Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> Well it is a bit soon for me to be using PovRay as a renderer. I want to
> be able to use Blender properly first. But you intrigued me.
> I downloaded the latest version of Blender (2.67a)
> In User Preferences > Renderer. Enable POV-Ray 3.7
> Expand the section and in Preferences (at the bottom of the section)
> Set the location of the PovRay exe.
> //..\..\..\..\..\..\Program Files\POV-Ray\v3.7 RC7\bin\pvengine64.exe
>
> Save User settings.
>
> In Blender set PovRay as the render engine and render.
>
> I got that chequerboard pattern screen then PovRay started and the scene
> rendered in PovRay. When I closed Pov the image appeared in Blender.
>
> I actually had pvengine.ini open in the PovRay editor (Windows) and this
> entry changed.
>
> [LastRender]
> SceneFile=QUICKRES
> OutputFile=c:\users\stephen\appdata\local\temp\tmpydyozc.png
> HistogramFile=
> IniOutputFile=
> CurrentDirectory=C:\Program Files\Blender Foundation\Blender
> SourceFile=C:\Program Files\Blender Foundation\Blender\tmpoluh0u.pov
>
> I changed PovRay's behaviour to close on completion and the whole cycle
> took about 4 seconds for a simple scene.

Thanks for that, Stephen! I didn't think to expand the addon entry in user
preferences to find the option. Figured I'd just get the link to the
documentation and "Report a Bug" like usual.

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 27/05/2013 12:21 PM, Stephen wrote:
> > I am having a problem with this. I can render a scene in PovRay if I
> > have created it after I enable POV-Ray 3.7 as the renderer. But if I try
> > to render an old scene (I only have one that I made myself) the PovRay
> > renders fails.
>
> FYI
> If I export the model as an OBJ then import it into a new scene. It will
> render in Pov.

OK, the same thing is happening over here. Gonna have to file a bug report now
:(

Sam

Post a reply to this message

"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> "Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > "Samuel Benge" <stb### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > > Pretty! I would love to see a larger version, perhaps with some dispersion :D
> >
> > I'll see what I can do ;) This version doesn't even use area light photons so I
> > could definitely crank it up a bit. Might tighten the view angle too.
>
> Here's a bigger version. I'd forgotten just how slow dispersion can get, so in
> the end I gave up waiting - this version uses area-light photons, but no
> dispersion :( There are still some slight fuzzy artifacts in the caustics, but
> it looks ok in general.

Looks good, even without dispersion ;) You going to try mixing them up in a
single container? :D

It would be great if POV-Ray got a render engine overhaul sometime. What I am
specifically thinking of here is if focal blur + dispersion were combined, to be
able to use a low dispersion_samples value that would be multiplied by the
camera's blur_samples value, to save time when rendering both. Same thing with
radiosity: multiply "count" by the camera's focal blur samples. After all, you
can already do this with area_lights, and radiosity to a degree (if all the
objects have a microscopic surface normal).

Sam

Post a reply to this message

On 27/05/2013 6:40 PM, Samuel Benge wrote:
> OK, the same thing is happening over here. Gonna have to file a bug report now

Good man. Saves me doing the registering thing.
Now that I've set up the render in Pov, I'll keep it and expand on it as 
I gain more proficiency in Blender.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"Samuel Benge" <stb### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Looks good, even without dispersion ;) You going to try mixing them up in a
> single container? :D

Hm, could do, but my ubuntu machine's on hiatus suddenly - it occurred to me
that I accidentally installed the 32-bit OS on a 64-bit machine, so I should
probably reinstall before I become too entrenched. I was going to move on to
chimney-felling next, but I might come back to the balls later :)

> It would be great if POV-Ray got a render engine overhaul sometime.
[snip wishlist]

I'd not thought about it that much... it would be nice if there was more control
over dispersion.

Bill

Post a reply to this message

Bill Pragnell wrote:
> "Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> "Samuel Benge" <stb### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>>> Pretty! I would love to see a larger version, perhaps with some dispersion :D
>>
>> I'll see what I can do ;) This version doesn't even use area light photons so I
>> could definitely crank it up a bit. Might tighten the view angle too.
>
> Here's a bigger version. I'd forgotten just how slow dispersion can get, so in
> the end I gave up waiting - this version uses area-light photons, but no
> dispersion :( There are still some slight fuzzy artifacts in the caustics, but
> it looks ok in general.
>

Nice image, it is a shame that all the things we like to use are so slow 
to render. Still this looks good as it is and great photons.

Sean

Post a reply to this message

On 05/27/2013 10:22 AM, Stephen wrote:
> FYI
> If I export the model as an OBJ then import it into a new scene. It will
> render in Pov.
>

have you tried saving as blender file ... then render? i've had some 
problems when i import 3ds files, do some cleanup then re-export the 
modified file as 3ds for use with poseray. some minor problems with 
origin cleared up when i did save 1st ... then export

Post a reply to this message

Hijacking this thread so I've moved my answer to you to a new one.
Continuing Blender-PovRay discussion.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> Hijacking this thread so I've moved my answer to you to a new one.

Take this thread straight to Cuba!

Post a reply to this message

On 28/05/2013 11:26 AM, Bill Pragnell wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>> Hijacking this thread so I've moved my answer to you to a new one.
>
> Take this thread straight to Cuba!
>
>
But I'm using a laptop. Cuda is no use to me.

Anyway the food in Cuba leaves a lot to be desired.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Just picking up on old posts I hadn't found the time to read, so here's 
some quite late reply...

Am 27.05.2013 19:52, schrieb Samuel Benge:

> It would be great if POV-Ray got a render engine overhaul sometime. What I am
> specifically thinking of here is if focal blur + dispersion were combined, to be
> able to use a low dispersion_samples value that would be multiplied by the
> camera's blur_samples value, to save time when rendering both.

Currently working on something along those lines, actually.

> Same thing with
> radiosity: multiply "count" by the camera's focal blur samples.

As for the combination of focal blur and radiosity, that won't fly, 
because radiosity samples are cached and re-used, so you don't get 
<blur_samples> * <radiosity count> secondary rays anyway. (That's 
actually the difference in technique between POV-Ray and MCPov as far as 
indirect illumination is concerned.)

It should work though for the combination of radiosity and other 
multi-sample effects, such as radiosity and area lights. (Not sure off 
the top of my head whether radiosity sampling currently honors area 
lights or just simplifies them to point lights.)

Post a reply to this message