POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.binaries.programming : We need a new 'render' statement Server Time
28 Mar 2024 10:09:17 EDT (-0400)
  We need a new 'render' statement (Message 1 to 6 of 6)  
From: Lukee
Subject: We need a new 'render' statement
Date: 19 Nov 1998 17:49:00
Message: <3654A085.DEAC2E8C@altavista.net>
Maybe I'm missing something, but I feel POVRay would strongly need some
kind of "render" statement. Let me explain: with version 3.1, POV has 

achieved the status of a nearly complete programming language. It has 

its own cyles, conditional tests, macros etc. BUT we still have to make 

animations by the quite primitive mathod of calling the program
repeatedly with different arguments: this means re-parsing every time

and no chance of doing a complex animation. I know, now POV can read and

write files, but using them to store temporary variable values seems to

me a bit dumb. What we really need is a siple "render" statement. e.g









#declare a_cross = union {



			cylinder { <-1.5,0,0>, <1.5,0,0>, 0.3}

			cylinder { <0,1.5,0>, <0,-1.5,0>, 0.3}		



		   }	











#macro DrawCross (rot,trans, colr)

	object {a_cross

		texture {pigment {color rgb colr}}

		rotate rot translate trans 

	}



#end







#declare cycles=0;



#while (cycles<36)

	DrawCross(<0,cycles*10,0>,<0,0,0>,<0,.8,.2>)

	#declare cycles=cycles+1;



	render <sort of a numbered-filename>//<- THIS IS THE NEW DIRECTIVE!



#end







The above code would render to a different file every time it comes upon

the "render" directive (36 times) from WITHIN the cycle, rather than at

the end of the complete parsing, thus outputting an animation. This way,
we could avoid working outside the POV program with limited .INI files
to achieve any kind of animation, at any level of complexity: particle
systems, mesh distortion/morphing ecc. POV would become the most
flexible 3D system in the world.



Am I wrong?



Could this be implemented via a patch (I don't think I have the skill to

do that)?



Please tell me your opinion!



Luca Rivelli <luk### [at] usanet>


Post a reply to this message

From: Gordon
Subject: Re: We need a new 'render' statement
Date: 22 Dec 1998 03:35:52
Message: <367f59e8.0@news.povray.org>
Please explain how this would work. Wouldn't you end up with another object
being added to the scene each time through the loop.

Povray has no way to delete or modify an object once it is declared.

Gordon

Lukee wrote in message <3654A085.DEAC2E8C@altavista.net>...
>Maybe I'm missing something, but I feel POVRay would strongly need some
>kind of "render" statement. Let me explain: with version 3.1, POV has
>
>achieved the status of a nearly complete programming language. It has
>
>its own cyles, conditional tests, macros etc. BUT we still have to make
>
>animations by the quite primitive mathod of calling the program
>repeatedly with different arguments: this means re-parsing every time
>
>and no chance of doing a complex animation. I know, now POV can read and
>
>write files, but using them to store temporary variable values seems to
>
>me a bit dumb. What we really need is a siple "render" statement. e.g
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>#declare a_cross = union {
>
>
>
> cylinder { <-1.5,0,0>, <1.5,0,0>, 0.3}
>
> cylinder { <0,1.5,0>, <0,-1.5,0>, 0.3}
>
>
>
>    }
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>#macro DrawCross (rot,trans, colr)
>
> object {a_cross
>
> texture {pigment {color rgb colr}}
>
> rotate rot translate trans
>
> }
>
>
>
>#end
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>#declare cycles=0;
>
>
>
>#while (cycles<36)
>
> DrawCross(<0,cycles*10,0>,<0,0,0>,<0,.8,.2>)
>
> #declare cycles=cycles+1;
>
>
>
> render <sort of a numbered-filename>//<- THIS IS THE NEW DIRECTIVE!
>
>
>
>#end
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>The above code would render to a different file every time it comes upon
>
>the "render" directive (36 times) from WITHIN the cycle, rather than at
>
>the end of the complete parsing, thus outputting an animation. This way,
>we could avoid working outside the POV program with limited .INI files
>to achieve any kind of animation, at any level of complexity: particle
>systems, mesh distortion/morphing ecc. POV would become the most
>flexible 3D system in the world.
>
>
>
>Am I wrong?
>
>
>
>Could this be implemented via a patch (I don't think I have the skill to
>
>do that)?
>
>
>
>Please tell me your opinion!
>
>
>
>Luca Rivelli <luk### [at] usanet>


Post a reply to this message

From: Bryan Valencia
Subject: Re: We need a new 'render' statement
Date: 29 Mar 1999 19:11:16
Message: <38E29B08.3B35B9F8@eloan.com>
Are you using the Windows Version?

If so, you can set up animations using the clock variable, and you can also
call an EXE during an animation loop.



Lukee wrote:

> Maybe I'm missing something, but I feel POVRay would strongly need some
> kind of "render" statement. Let me explain: with version 3.1, POV has
>
> achieved the status of a nearly complete programming language. It has
>
> its own cyles, conditional tests, macros etc. BUT we still have to make
>
> animations by the quite primitive mathod of calling the program
> repeatedly with different arguments: this means re-parsing every time
>
> and no chance of doing a complex animation. I know, now POV can read and
>
> write files, but using them to store temporary variable values seems to
>
> me a bit dumb. What we really need is a siple "render" statement. e.g
>
> #declare a_cross = union {
>
>                         cylinder { <-1.5,0,0>, <1.5,0,0>, 0.3}
>
>                         cylinder { <0,1.5,0>, <0,-1.5,0>, 0.3}
>
>                    }
>
> #macro DrawCross (rot,trans, colr)
>
>         object {a_cross
>
>                 texture {pigment {color rgb colr}}
>
>                 rotate rot translate trans
>
>         }
>
> #end
>
> #declare cycles=0;
>
> #while (cycles<36)
>
>         DrawCross(<0,cycles*10,0>,<0,0,0>,<0,.8,.2>)
>
>         #declare cycles=cycles+1;
>
>         render <sort of a numbered-filename>//<- THIS IS THE NEW DIRECTIVE!
>
> #end
>
> The above code would render to a different file every time it comes upon
>
> the "render" directive (36 times) from WITHIN the cycle, rather than at
>
> the end of the complete parsing, thus outputting an animation. This way,
> we could avoid working outside the POV program with limited .INI files
> to achieve any kind of animation, at any level of complexity: particle
> systems, mesh distortion/morphing ecc. POV would become the most
> flexible 3D system in the world.
>
> Am I wrong?
>
> Could this be implemented via a patch (I don't think I have the skill to
>
> do that)?
>
> Please tell me your opinion!
>
> Luca Rivelli <luk### [at] usanet>

--
Bryan Valencia
Software Services
http://www.209software.com
mailto:bry### [at] 209softwarecom


Post a reply to this message

From: Hassoun
Subject: Re: We need a new 'render' statement
Date: 21 May 1999 10:11:32
Message: <37455B2A.971BD33@sympatico.ca>
Hi
i am familiar with the use of the clock variable for animation, but
would you please explain the advantages of calling an EXE during an
animation. how would it help?

thanks
Hassoun

Bryan Valencia wrote:
> 
> Are you using the Windows Version?
> 
> If so, you can set up animations using the clock variable, and you can also
> call an EXE during an animation loop.
> 

> --
> Bryan Valencia
> Software Services
> http://www.209software.com
> mailto:bry### [at] 209softwarecom


Post a reply to this message

From: Bryan Valencia
Subject: Re: We need a new 'render' statement
Date: 27 Feb 2001 14:44:03
Message: <3A9C043F.6332FF79@209software.com>
Let's say you wrote an AI routine that made a ship attack targets or implemented
gravity or wind velocity.

You could call the exe repeatedly and it could store it's last state.


Hassoun wrote:

> Hi
> i am familiar with the use of the clock variable for animation, but
> would you please explain the advantages of calling an EXE during an
> animation. how would it help?
>
> thanks
> Hassoun
>
> Bryan Valencia wrote:
> >
> > Are you using the Windows Version?
> >
> > If so, you can set up animations using the clock variable, and you can also
> > call an EXE during an animation loop.
> >
>
> > --
> > Bryan Valencia
> > Software Services
> > http://www.209software.com
> > mailto:bry### [at] 209softwarecom


Post a reply to this message

From: Jérôme Grimbert
Subject: Re: We need a new 'render' statement
Date: 28 Feb 2001 04:16:30
Message: <3A9CC249.27F42794@atosorigin.com>
Bryan Valencia wrote:
> 
> Let's say you wrote an AI routine that made a ship attack targets or implemented
> gravity or wind velocity.
> 
> You could call the exe repeatedly and it could store it's last state.
> 

I would rather have the exe called outside of POV and store each result into
a distinct file (so that distributed rendering could be easy).
The filename could of course be based on the clock value and
the pov-scene would simply #include the one for the current clock.


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.