Ive <ive### [at] lilysoftorg> wrote:

>
> I'm can assure you that in 1996 absolutely nobody did use assumed_gamma
> 1.0 for reasons that are actually quite obvious even if you do not
> understand them.

Gee, I guess I don't, not being blessed with your obviously superior and
all-seeing knowledge.

>
> Well, my understanding was that this is not just about this particular
> granite file, but about a correct way to convert in general old textures
> from times were *never* assumed_gamma = 1.0 was used.
>
> Obviously this is not the case, sorry for this misunderstanding on my
> part but frankly you should have said so in the first place and should
> not have added a bunch of buzz words borrowed from color science into
> your header where these words make no sense at all.

Gee, an actual half-baked apology? From Your Highness?! (with a dose of further
insults, of course) Wow. I'll bet you choked on it, trying to get it out.
>
> So I did completely waste my time here...

Gee, that's sad.
>
> My conclusion: my first thought was right, so please do not mention me
> in any of your files, seriously I mean it.

Gee, that sounds SERIOUS. You mean it! (...or else?...) Personally, I would pay
no attention to such egotistic claptrap. It actually makes me laugh. And if you
felt insulted and wronged and that your *orders* were not being paid attention
to, you would be welcome to take your case to the International Criminal Court
of Justice to seek redress...if they don't laugh too, and kick you out of the
building.

>
> No need to bother with a reply

Yes Sir, if you say so Sir.

 I'm outa here

Gee, that's sad too. I guess you'll be flying back to Mount Olympus now, to be
among your fellow Gods. Well, don't let the door slam on your way out!
*Somehow*, the rest of us will manage to get along...
>
> so long - Ive

Send us a postcard from On High.

------
But I still like your IC app; I'm not yet going to tear it from my computer and
burn its bytes in a fit of childish temper...like you have displayed.

You may take your toys and go home now.

Post a reply to this message

"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>
> > Yes, the 'Cornell box' scene is in SCENES/RADIOSITY (I had to hunt for it.)
>
> I peeked there, but it was the most cursory of late-night scans...

What?! You only *peeked* at it??  No No No, that is NOT the 'POV-ray way'. The
rules are clearly spelled out in chapters 7,43, and 129 of the 'POV-ray
Behavior' manual. Don't tell me you haven't read them??
>
>
> And I do wish that kids like you and that DeGroot hoodlum would just
> GROW UP and have a little maturity.  You spoiled children clearly flaunt
> your privilege...

SPOILED?! Oh, you mean, because of that $50 million I inherited when I was 2
months old? Naw, I've always been the same lovable, cuddly, ever-so-pleasant
fellow that I was before then. I think.

> ...you'd burn down the city around you to show it - maybe even plowing
> through a crowd of quartz and feldspar lovers with your van in the process.

Personally, I would prefer olivine and soapstone lovers...they always irritate
me...

Post a reply to this message

Op 16/04/2021 om 19:17 schreef Bald Eagle:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> I find the
>> result too reflective and really difficult to manage correctly. The hue
>> changes dramatically with changes to the reflection value or the
>> specular albedo block.
> 
> Whoa.  That's super shiny.  It looks like polished marble dipped in
> polyurethane.
> 
> It took me while of looking over the surface to understand that what I thought
> might be some weird artefact is actually the reflection of the edge of your
> curved plane and the sky_sphere.
> 
> This would be a great texture to apply to make wet granite - maybe a bird bath
> or a fountain or something.  I'm sure it would look interesting to texture an
> isosurface with this and apply a few off-center radial sine-waves.
> 

See? In another post I've (sic) ;-) mentioned "serendipity" and... there 
we are!

Excellent suggestion! I shall put this in another file for later.

[where are my Round Tuits...? I really, I mean: Really, need more Round 
Tuits...]

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Op 17/04/2021 om 05:20 schreef Kenneth:
> "Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>> "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, the 'Cornell box' scene is in SCENES/RADIOSITY (I had to hunt for it.)
>>
>> I peeked there, but it was the most cursory of late-night scans...
> 
> What?! You only *peeked* at it??  No No No, that is NOT the 'POV-ray way'. The
> rules are clearly spelled out in chapters 7,43, and 129 of the 'POV-ray
> Behavior' manual. Don't tell me you haven't read them??

Well... what did you expect, frankly? Big words and bla-bla imo. 
"late-night scans"...!  Whoaaa-ha-ha!

[have another beer]

>>
>>
>> And I do wish that kids like you and that DeGroot hoodlum would just
>> GROW UP and have a little maturity.  You spoiled children clearly flaunt
>> your privilege...
> 
> SPOILED?! Oh, you mean, because of that $50 million I inherited when I was 2
> months old? Naw, I've always been the same lovable, cuddly, ever-so-pleasant
> fellow that I was before then. I think.

Thanks for the loan, btw!  Whoaa-ha-haaa!

[Have abeer an otter...]

> 
>> ...you'd burn down the city around you to show it - maybe even plowing
>> through a crowd of quartz and feldspar lovers with your van in the process.
> 
> Personally, I would prefer olivine and soapstone lovers...they always irritate
> me...

nah... bunch of creeps... [burp]

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Op 11-4-2021 om 14:48 schreef Mr:
> [snip]  Or combine
> two variants of that pattern with both scales using a third masking /warping
> pattern, so that variation seems less homogenous. 

Experimental and with finish commented-out.

Not bad at all!

Thanks for the suggestion. It took some time, but I am getting there.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'layeredtextures_finish_test.jpg' (91 KB)

Preview of image 'layeredtextures_finish_test.jpg'

After reworking the top layer.


-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'mohoganypol2-2.jpg' (98 KB)

Preview of image 'mohoganypol2-2.jpg'

Op 16/04/2021 om 11:28 schreef Ive:
 > Well, my understanding was that this is not just about this particular
 > granite file, but about a correct way to convert in general old textures
 > from times were *never* assumed_gamma = 1.0 was used.
 >
 > Obviously this is not the case, sorry for this misunderstanding on my
 > part, but frankly you should have said so in the first place and should
 > not have added a bunch of buzz words borrowed from color science into
 > your header where these words make no sense at all.
 >

Yve,

Possibly, you are not going to read this, so I write for my own benefit 
(and for those who might be interested) and because I feel I am entitled 
to give a serious answer (after a bit of charivari to vent frustrations).

Initially, this whole exercise was indeed, about upgrading old files. As 
so often happens in the (creative) process, things evolved quite rapidly 
and soon enough granites21 was about generating a new granites 
construction, */based on the work of Daniel Meklenburg/*, I want to 
stress. I am afraid you missed the (gradual) shift to this new approach; 
I was taken by surprise myself I must confess. So, your contribution is 
/not/ a waste of time. On the contrary, it is invaluable for taking up 
the /original/ granites.inc and provide a comprehensive document 
corrected to the use of POV-Ray 3.7+ in a not too distant future. In 
your file there are many things I did not know/been aware of or had 
forgotten. So, again, thanks indeed for your contribution. You are not 
rid of me: in due time I shall give my comments on your file.

You and me, we are both part of the scientific community at large I 
understand. You are a professional (I guess) of the colour sciences; I 
am a professional of the geological sciences. The fundamental difference 
however between us, as I surmise, is that colour sciences are 
/necessarily/ part of the /exact/ sciences, while geological sciences 
are, for a large part, not. Geology is as much about reconstructing, 
from partly preserved items, environments and life from the past, 
without having enough elements to be able to do so in an /exact/ way. 
Where necessary, we make use of the exact sciences, and increasingly so, 
but we are as much indebted to creativity and leaps of faith in order to 
reach consensus and progress. We are rewarded by the visions and 
reconstructions of the ancient world as they evolve under our hands as 
it were.

This is why we have very different approaches to these matters of colour 
in particular. I certainly expect a rigorous approach from you, and I 
would have been surprised if you were not, in the matters of your 
expertise field. On the other hand, while acknowledging this, I feel 
rather free to use some results from the colour sciences as they are 
made available to the POV-Ray community, in maybe a twisty way but 
important for the creative process where the visible results are 
important. So, if I only talk for myself, I use different rgb and/or 
srgb elements together in the same scene and nobody can pinpoint them 
separately I am sure. I understand your irritation about the use of 
possibly inappropriate terms from the colour sciences and I got rid of 
them in the next version of granites21. Understand that my objective was 
to be as precise as possible, but without your kind of understanding 
this is certainly prone to errors.

A last remark. I take exception to your impatience when you mention that 
"it seems you did not even bother to look at my code" and that *within 
24 hours* of your initial post! I resent this indeed. You have 
absolutely no idea about the frequency and time I spend on POV-Ray, 
including reading and commenting on posts. I mentioned that I have a 
life in the Real World, as you have too I am sure, and that takes 
absolute priority. Well, let me tell you that during each 24 hours I 
spend maybe two hour *maximum* to POV-Ray (including posts), divided 
over several snippets of time during the day. So, gimme a break, OK?

All right. Enough about this. I hope you understand if you read this, 
and let's close the matter definitively. If you want to answer, you are 
welcome indeed, but I consider the war axe to be buried from now on.

Cheers

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:

Sarcasm and satire aside,
You need to deal with the fact that there is a large and rapidly increasing
number of people out in the world that suffer from mental illness.  They may
_seem_ normal in certain isolated settings, but it only takes the slightest
nudge to flip things over that threshold.

> I am afraid you missed the (gradual) shift to this new approach;

Nah,  If you pay attention to the "pattern" of posting, one can surmise that
like some other people, there's some type of monitoring software being used, and
after months or years of absence, they suddenly appear from seemingly nowhere to
get offended over something, rave, and generally "stir the pot".


> You and me, we are both part of the scientific community at large I
> understand.

Be careful.  You're projecting.  Soon you will begin to attempt to rationalize
the irrational and get "sucked in".  I can't tell you how many "scientists",
"professors", "grad students", "experts", "professionals", "mathematicians", and
"programmers" - who you'd think would be logical and at least stable - but you
shift to a certain topic, and it all goes straight out the window.
Imprinting, trauma, brainwashing, and Stockholm Syndrome are all very real, very
dangerous things.   Amongst many others.



> I understand your irritation about

.... everything.  It's the way everyone in the world is now.   They do
archaeology to uncover decades old thing to be offended about, and when that's
too much work, they invent fictitious "new" things to take offense at.

> A last remark. I take exception to your impatience when you mention that
> "it seems you did not even bother to look at my code" and that *within
> 24 hours* of your initial post! I resent this indeed. You have
> absolutely no idea about the frequency and time I spend on POV-Ray,
> including reading and commenting on posts. I mentioned that I have a
> life in the Real World, as you have too I am sure, and that takes
> absolute priority. Well, let me tell you that during each 24 hours I
> spend maybe two hour *maximum* to POV-Ray (including posts), divided
> over several snippets of time during the day. So, gimme a break, OK?

I sometimes get impatient for responses, especially when I'm working on
something and need ("want") some assistance to move past some difficulty and
reach a solution or workaround.  But that's not really the case here.
I'm calling "rabid instability".  Maybe he's taken up eating paint.

I have work, home, child, meals, shopping, laundry, garden, relationships,
neighbors, favors, friends, community involvement, and plenty of other things
that take me away from making any "meaningful progress" on any number of _hobby_
projects, let alone starting any new ones.  And my mechanism of making a "to-do
list" is starting a project so that it's physically there to remind me of it.

> All right. Enough about this. I hope you understand if you read this,
> and let's close the matter definitively. If you want to answer, you are
> welcome indeed, but I consider the war axe to be buried from now on.

Toxic people get offended and will try to flip things around and in true Saul
Alinsky fashion, accuse YOU for holding a grudge.  "Nah, little buddy.  That's
called a boundary."

I've been through all of this in a very personal, very real, very consequential
manner.  So I can see what's going on instantly, with pretty good clarity.  And
I know how to follow the breadcrumbs (vide infra).

"The emotional maturity of a typical narcissistic person is akin to a 5-year-old
child who pouts and refuses to play with a friend in the sandbox because the
friend wants to share the pail and shovel. The 5-year-old refuses to talk with
the friend and angrily storms off to play on the jungle gym with someone else."

https://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/silent-treatment-a-narcissistic-persons-preferred-weapon-0602145

view-source:https://

Post a reply to this message

Op 18-4-2021 om 14:58 schreef Bald Eagle:
Thank you Bill, I do really appreciate indeed your comments and I am 
sadly aware of your own experience of this. The thought passed through 
my mind too. However, I wanted to give Yve what in French is called "Le 

own conviction, whatever he may make of it.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

hi,

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> Op 18-4-2021 om 14:58 schreef Bald Eagle:
> Thank you Bill, I do really appreciate indeed your comments ...
> my mind too. However, I wanted to give Yve what in French is called "Le

umlauts + accents etc (currently) cause hiccups.


> own conviction, whatever he may make of it.

only two things to .. observe -- why "Yve"?  some Freudian thing?  :-)  concur
with BE, "ingrown toenails", likely.  not your problem.


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message