I wondered if I could make an image similar to this one with megapov.
  This is the result:

#version Unofficial MegaPov 0.6;

global_settings { ambient_light 0 }

camera { right x location <0,5.5,-8>*1.1 look_at -y*.4 angle 35 }
light_source
{ <3.5,3.5,-2>, 1
  fade_distance 6 fade_power 2
  area_light x,y,6,6 adaptive 0 jitter orient
}
background { rgb <.7,.85,.95> }

plane
{ y,-.5
  pigment { rgb 1 }
  finish { specular .5 roughness .02 reflection .2 }
}

isosurface
{ function
  { sqrt(sqr(sqrt(sqr(x)+sqr(z))-1.5)+sqr(y))-(.3+.2*sin(8*atan2(x,z))) }
  contained_by { box { -<2,.5,2>,<2,.5,2> } }
  method 2 max_gradient 2.41 accuracy 10^-6
  pigment { rgb 0 }
  finish { specular 4 roughness .05 reflection .5 }
}

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test.jpg' (28 KB)

Preview of image 'test.jpg'

Actually, changing the color of the isosurface from "rgb 0" to
"rgb <.25,.2,.05>" made it look even more like the original:

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test.jpg' (29 KB)

Preview of image 'test.jpg'

Hugo <hua### [at] post3teledk> wrote:
: I am disappointed. In some cases, these free light-algoritms render
: better than POV

  Which cases?

  I tried to make a similar image to that lightflow example with megapov
and it wasn't even hard:

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test.jpg' (29 KB)

Preview of image 'test.jpg'

Warp wrote:
>   Actually, changing the color of the isosurface from "rgb 0" to
> "rgb <.25,.2,.05>" made it look even more like the original:

Awesome. I am impressed.

-- 
          /"\                           |    iki.
          \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign |    fi/
           X      Against HTML Mail     |    zds
          / \

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

>   Actually, changing the color of the isosurface from "rgb 0" to
> "rgb <.25,.2,.05>" made it look even more like the original:

One fun thing would be to take some demo images from some famous packages,
redo them in Povray and bundle the code with 3.5. I'm not sure about
possible legal problems but still...


G.

--

**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
Graphic experiments
Pov-ray gallery

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:
> 
> One fun thing would be to take some demo images from some famous packages,
> redo them in Povray and bundle the code with 3.5. I'm not sure about
> possible legal problems but still...
> 

That would surely be interesting, but on the other hand, each program
tries to show it's strength in such scenes and at the same time tries to
avoid the weak points. Copying such demo scenes would therefore show the
ability to do the same things as another program, but would not show one
of the main advantages of Povray, namely to handle a very large variety of
different effects.  

Christoph

-- 
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other 
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

Ron Parker wrote:
> Quite possibly because POV has been around since long before those
> algorithms were known.  Possibly because we do this in our spare time.
> Possibly because nobody's ever mentioned them before.  Possibly
> because, as Nathan mentioned, they don't work all that well in
> raytracers that use implicit surfaces.

Thanks Ron, for your reply.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to blame and I understand your arguments. But I
was disappointed by what seems like unnecessary competition. I have the
greatest respect for the POV authors. I didn't mean THEY should have
implemented the formulas in the first place. The author of Lightflow
COULD have done it however, since his product seems like a POV concept.
And we don't need incompatible programs. POV is already established and
well known.

>> >> In some cases, these free light-algoritms render better than POV
>> Which cases? 

Great, Warp! This is indeed very nice! I doubted this was possible. 

The pictures I referred to as being better, well, were mostly the glassy
versions found on the lightflow homepage, buuut.. Hmm now I dare believe
they can be done in POV with the exsisting formulas.. I am surprised.
Hmmm. What a day.


Hugo

Post a reply to this message

"Christoph Hormann" <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3AE72B62.2356DA79@gmx.de...
> That would surely be interesting, but on the other hand, each program
> tries to show it's strength in such scenes and at the same time tries to
> avoid the weak points. Copying such demo scenes would therefore show the
> ability to do the same things as another program, but would not show one
> of the main advantages of Povray, namely to handle a very large variety of
> different effects.


Yeah, so, add those scene files as well. POV should come with scene files
that show EVERY area that POV excels.. including those that other progs
excel at too.

After all, that's one of the beauties of text scene files, they can take up
so little space, especially when compressed in the prog distribution.

I'd like the distro to have many more scene files, perhaps donated by users.
Obviously, POV 3.5 would have to be out for a while before people could code
scenes for it, but there'll no doubt be program updates, and they could be
included there.

Andy

Post a reply to this message

> : I am disappointed. In some cases, these free light-algoritms render
> : better than POV
>
>   Which cases?
>
>   I tried to make a similar image to that lightflow example with megapov
> and it wasn't even hard:

as you have demonstrated, POV is an excellent tool, it just takes a little
understanding :)

reminds me of the Arnold images, everybody went wow, and days later we were
all doing the same with pov ..


--
Rick

Kitty5 WebDesign - http://Kitty5.com
Hi-Impact database driven web site design & e-commerce
TEL : +44 (01625) 266358 - FAX : +44 (01625) 611913 - ICQ : 15776037
POV-Ray News & Resources - http://Povray.co.uk

PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA

Post a reply to this message

> > One fun thing would be to take some demo images from some famous
packages,
> > redo them in Povray and bundle the code with 3.5. I'm not sure about
> > possible legal problems but still...
> >
>
> That would surely be interesting, but on the other hand, each program
> tries to show it's strength in such scenes and at the same time tries to
> avoid the weak points. Copying such demo scenes would therefore show the
> ability to do the same things as another program, but would not show one
> of the main advantages of Povray, namely to handle a very large variety of
> different effects.

How about this: Take each of those scenes and add something that couldn't be
done with those programs into those scenes.

Nekar

Post a reply to this message