Drroooool.... Ron, at least set things up to put it in the next MegaPOV...
pleeease... :)

Post a reply to this message

"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:slr### [at] fwicom...
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 22:43:44 +0200, JRG wrote:
> >> So what's so special about this patch compared to the old reflection
blur?
> >> Well, let's just say it's not limited to reflection, shall we?
> >
> >(something like stochastic raytracing?)
>
> Sort of.  I've added a "supersample n,d" statement to the finish
statement,
> which causes POV to evaluate the texture n times while jittering the
normal's
> evaluation point within d of the actual evaluation point.  That means
that,
> if you have the CPU horsepower, you can do blurred isotropic reflection as
> with the old patch, but also blurred anisotropic reflection, both kinds of
> transmission, and maybe even real specular highlights, just by adding a
> very small-scale normal to the surface.

This surely has lots of applications... any chance to see it either in the
official release or in the next versions of MegaPov? (pleonastic
question...)

--
Jonathan.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 23:23:41 +0200, JRG wrote:
>This surely has lots of applications... any chance to see it either in the
>official release or in the next versions of MegaPov? (pleonastic
>question...)

I'll make sure it at least gets in the next (3.5) version of MegaPOV.  No
guarantees about 3.5, because it's technically in feature lock.

-- 
#macro R(L P)sphere{L F}cylinder{L P F}#end#macro P(V)merge{R(z+a z)R(-z a-z)R(a
-z-z-z a+z)torus{1F clipped_by{plane{a 0}}}translate V}#end#macro Z(a F T)merge{
P(z+a)P(z-a)R(-z-z-x a)pigment{rgbf 1}hollow interior{media{emission 3-T}}}#end 
Z(-x-x.2x)camera{location z*-10rotate x*90normal{bumps.02scale.05}}

Post a reply to this message

"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:slr### [at] fwicom...
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 23:23:41 +0200, JRG wrote:
> >This surely has lots of applications... any chance to see it either in
the
> >official release or in the next versions of MegaPov? (pleonastic
> >question...)
>
> I'll make sure it at least gets in the next (3.5) version of MegaPOV.  No
> guarantees about 3.5, because it's technically in feature lock.

Uh? From 0.7 to 3.5 will be a *giant* upgrade ;)

--
Jonathan.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 23:36:50 +0200, JRG wrote:
>"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> ha scritto nel messaggio
>news:slr### [at] fwicom...
>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 23:23:41 +0200, JRG wrote:
>> >This surely has lots of applications... any chance to see it either in
>the
>> >official release or in the next versions of MegaPov? (pleonastic
>> >question...)
>>
>> I'll make sure it at least gets in the next (3.5) version of MegaPOV.  No
>> guarantees about 3.5, because it's technically in feature lock.
>
>Uh? From 0.7 to 3.5 will be a *giant* upgrade ;)

I meant, the next version based on the official 3.5.

-- 
#macro R(P)z+_(P)_(P)_(P+1)_(P+1)+z#end#macro Q(C)bicubic_patch{type 1u_steps 6
v_steps 6R(1)R(3)R(5)R(7)translate 9*z-2pigment{rgb z}}#end#macro _(Y)#local X=
asc(substr(C,Y,1))-65;<mod(X,4)div(X,4)>#end#local O=union{Q("ABEFUQWS")Q(// RON
"WSXTLOJN")}Q("JNKLCGCD")union{O}union{O translate 3*x}light_source{x 1}//PARKER

Post a reply to this message

Ron Parker wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 22:43:44 +0200, JRG wrote:
> >> So what's so special about this patch compared to the old reflection blur?
> >> Well, let's just say it's not limited to reflection, shall we?
> >
> >(something like stochastic raytracing?)
> 
> Sort of.  I've added a "supersample n,d" statement to the finish statement,
> which causes POV to evaluate the texture n times while jittering the normal's
> evaluation point within d of the actual evaluation point.

Wouldn't it make sense to use something more geometric than a random
jitter? Or does that cause artifacts or something? (Of course, you would
then need at least, I dunno, four or five samples to get reasonable
results, but you'd need at least that many anyway...)

-Xplo

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 18 Oct 2001 10:37:21 -0700, Xplo Eristotle wrote:
>Wouldn't it make sense to use something more geometric than a random
>jitter? Or does that cause artifacts or something? (Of course, you would
>then need at least, I dunno, four or five samples to get reasonable
>results, but you'd need at least that many anyway...)

Well, mathematically I don't see that there'd be much difference in the
two methods, since the underlying normal is itself likely to be somewhat
random.  Adaptive jitter might lead to a more ordered approach, though.
This morning I finished rendering a "real" test image, an anisotropic 
blurred transmission test.  At 512x384, with 33 samples per intersection
(but two surfaces to the box, so really 1089 samples per pixel, it took
just under 12 hours to render on my P200 but the results were beautiful.

In other news, I thought of a way to get true blurred reflection without
a custom patch; it just requires one little bugfix in 3.5 and a seriously
layered texture.

-- 
#local R=<7084844682857967,0787982,826975826580>;#macro L(P)concat(#while(P)chr(
mod(P,100)),#local P=P/100;#end"")#end background{rgb 1}text{ttf L(R.x)L(R.y)0,0
translate<-.8,0,-1>}text{ttf L(R.x)L(R.z)0,0translate<-1.6,-.75,-1>}sphere{z/9e3
4/26/2001finish{reflection 1}}//ron.parker@povray.org My opinions, nobody else's

Post a reply to this message

"JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message news:3bcdf6ec$1@news.povray.org...
> ... (pleonastic
> question...)
>
> --
> Jonathan.

*grin*  Learn something new every day.

Michael
--
camera{location<8,20>look_at<6,0,4>}light_source{<8,8>rgb 1}difference{union{
#macro M(D,J)#local R=asc(substr(D,J,1))-32;<div(R,10)*2,mod(R,10)>#end#macro
E(D,B,R)prism{-D,4+D,R#local C=1;#while(C<R+1)M(B,C)#local C=C+1;#end}#end E(
0," (2:FPKAD80* U_dZU"18)sphere{2,2}#macro T(N)cylinder{<9,-N,3><9,4+N,3>3-N}
#end T(0)}T(2)E(1"45LNXUK4"8)pigment{rgb x+y/2}}//(c)2001 MDJohnson(Redbeard)

Post a reply to this message

Uh?

"Redbeard (MDJohnson)" <red### [at] wvadelphianet> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:3bd18b47@news.povray.org...
>
> "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:3bcdf6ec$1@news.povray.org...
> > ... (pleonastic
> > question...)
> >
> > --
> > Jonathan.
>
> *grin*  Learn something new every day.
>
> Michael
> --
> camera{location<8,20>look_at<6,0,4>}light_source{<8,8>rgb
1}difference{union{
> #macro M(D,J)#local
R=asc(substr(D,J,1))-32;<div(R,10)*2,mod(R,10)>#end#macro
> E(D,B,R)prism{-D,4+D,R#local C=1;#while(C<R+1)M(B,C)#local C=C+1;#end}#end
E(
> 0," (2:FPKAD80* U_dZU"18)sphere{2,2}#macro
T(N)cylinder{<9,-N,3><9,4+N,3>3-N}
> #end T(0)}T(2)E(1"45LNXUK4"8)pigment{rgb x+y/2}}//(c)2001
MDJohnson(Redbeard)
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Never heard the word 'pleonastic' before.

"JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message news:3bd303e3@news.povray.org...
> Uh?
>
> "Redbeard (MDJohnson)" <red### [at] wvadelphianet> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:3bd18b47@news.povray.org...
> >
> > "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
> news:3bcdf6ec$1@news.povray.org...
> > > ... (pleonastic
> > > question...)
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jonathan.
> >
> > *grin*  Learn something new every day.
> >
> > Michael
> > --

Post a reply to this message