> Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure a lot of people on this newsgroup knows what horror it
>> is to see an idle CPU. I keep mine busy.
> 
> keep it up and it won't hold for long... ;)

This heavy usage indeed lowers CPU life, but not enough to be an issue, 
because it would become obsolete way before that anyway. Quote:

> 2) Anything wears out faster when in action than when iddle (and 
> especially when switching between active and iddle). The question isn't 
> really relevant, you should rather ask if anything wears out faster than 
> when its replacement would otherwise have been expected. (Whether a 
> harddrive lasts 20 years or 10 years doesn't matter if you replace it in 
> 5...)

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> wrote:

> > Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> wrote:
> >> I'm pretty sure a lot of people on this newsgroup knows what horror it
> >> is to see an idle CPU. I keep mine busy.
> >
> > keep it up and it won't hold for long... ;)
>
> This heavy usage indeed lowers CPU life, but not enough to be an issue,
> because it would become obsolete way before that anyway. Quote:
>
> > 2) Anything wears out faster when in action than when iddle (and
> > especially when switching between active and iddle). The question isn't
> > really relevant, you should rather ask if anything wears out faster than
> > when its replacement would otherwise have been expected. (Whether a
> > harddrive lasts 20 years or 10 years doesn't matter if you replace it in
> > 5...)

hmm, yes.  But geeks don't think that way:  we want to optimize and be
lightweight!  If I can save my CPU from a burning death, I will do go out of my
way to do it.  Other than halting povray, that is... :)

Post a reply to this message

> whew!  50 hours for, what?, 10 choppers?!  I beat you 2:  I rendered 9 simple
> glasses in 44 hours!  my next project is to render a RSOCP in 100 hours! :P

No, only 3 hours. Plus 47 hours for creating a photon map from 
badly-bounded shapes :)

Post a reply to this message

> hmm, yes.  But geeks don't think that way:  we want to optimize and be
> lightweight!  If I can save my CPU from a burning death, I will do go out of my
> way to do it.  Other than halting povray, that is... :)

Maybe the geeks you know. The geeks *I* know would buy more computers 
just to run those distributed computing projects.

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> wrote:

> > whew!  50 hours for, what?, 10 choppers?!  I beat you 2:  I rendered 9 simple
> > glasses in 44 hours!  my next project is to render a RSOCP in 100 hours! :P
>
> No, only 3 hours. Plus 47 hours for creating a photon map from
> badly-bounded shapes :)

oh!  there are photons?!  *scrutinizes image*

yes, there seems there are photons after all:  they seem to show up in the
ground just below the shiny reflective chopper fronts.  But problem is:  from
the point-of-view chosen, it's hardly visible.  Luckly, the photon map is
saved, and getting a close-up shot of the effect should be much easier.  It
seems the only reason for the insane photon map build time is the high number
of reflective geometries there.

Post a reply to this message

Hey - that's interesting! Your colors look better than the colors in my 
image! I wonder, why.

What version of POV-Ray do you use, Nicolas?

Sven


"Nicolas Alvarez" <nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> schrieb im 
Newsbeitrag news:47a111e5@news.povray.org...
> Description from the scene file:
>
>> About: My persistence of the vision of a small ultra-light helicoper,
>> featuring a small engine and made of fiber glass (the case) and plexi
>> glass (for the canopy). Note the two conter-rotating rotors beside
>> each other.  This helicopter could carry, as concepted with this
>> file, one adult normally and probably another one in some cases, or
>> some light freight beside the pilot.
>
> Full credits go to Sven Littkowski, all I did was the 50-hour render :)
>

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> This heavy usage indeed lowers CPU life, but not enough to be an issue,

Significantly more of an issue is the extra amount of electricity you
chew through doing this.

-- 
William Tracy
afi### [at] gmailcom -- wtr### [at] calpolyedu

You know you've been raytracing too long when you get lots of "undefined
or invalid # directive"-errors when programming in C++.
    -- Warp
(...I have discovered that Warp is quite correct about this.)

Post a reply to this message

> oh!  there are photons?!  *scrutinizes image*
> 
> yes, there seems there are photons after all:  they seem to show up in the
> ground just below the shiny reflective chopper fronts.  But problem is:  from
> the point-of-view chosen, it's hardly visible.  Luckly, the photon map is
> saved, and getting a close-up shot of the effect should be much easier.  It
> seems the only reason for the insane photon map build time is the high number
> of reflective geometries there.

Remember the statistics I posted before: the number of photons finally 
stored was quite low, 0.1% of the photons shot.

Post a reply to this message

Sven Littkowski escribió:
> Hey - that's interesting! Your colors look better than the colors in my 
> image! I wonder, why.
> 
> What version of POV-Ray do you use, Nicolas?
> 

3.6.1a

Note I disabled radiosity, that could be related... :)

Post a reply to this message

Yes, that might be it. I use the same version. Hmm, it looks better without 
radiosity.

I made a list of TO-DOs:
- Render again but without radiosity
- remove the interior to get a better canopy glass
- correct the rotor blade joints on the right rotors

The positive side effect with the first two points in that list is, that 
they will speed up the render time.

I would like to invite you all, to get my scene file and do your own 
textures on my little helichopper baby. Also, the entire chopper is a 
macro - you can animate it (doors, rotors, rotor angle)! Would you like? If 
I get a positive feedback, I will release my source code to the publicity 
(after the neccessary corrections are done). So: WHO WOULD LIEK TO GET THE 
HELICHOPPER SOURCECODE?

Sven



"Nicolas Alvarez" <nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> schrieb im 
Newsbeitrag news:47a1f955$1@news.povray.org...

>> Hey - that's interesting! Your colors look better than the colors in my 
>> image! I wonder, why.
>>
>> What version of POV-Ray do you use, Nicolas?
>>
>
> 3.6.1a
>
> Note I disabled radiosity, that could be related... :)

Post a reply to this message