Two or three questions for you to help guide me with the next version of
AutoCAD2POV:

1)    When exporting solid models:  A very good mesh representation with
more modeling options (i.e. fillets, chamfers, etc of solid objects) or
actual solid models (union { sphere { xxx } box { xxx } })?

2)    A separate parser, as it is now, or an interface integrated within
AutoCAD itself, perhaps with a GUI extension to POV?

3)    Any requests?

Thanks much for your input, it will help me GREATLY in guiding the next
release.  I hope it will be a big improvement, be easier and more powerful,
all that good stuff.  I'm very pleased with the response I've gotten
thusfar.  Feel free to reply to my email or to the group.

Post a reply to this message

> 1)    When exporting solid models:  A very good mesh representation with
> more modeling options (i.e. fillets, chamfers, etc of solid objects) or
> actual solid models (union { sphere { xxx } box { xxx } })?

If you have the time, the two possibilities look interesting. If not, choose
the CSG approach, as this seems most logically for solid objects.

> 2)    A separate parser, as it is now, or an interface integrated within
> AutoCAD itself, perhaps with a GUI extension to POV?

Make it a seperate parser. Then other CAD-users could use it (ArchiCAD,
IntelliCAD etc...)

> 3)    Any requests?

Some easy to set up texturing? The more structured the output, the more use
it will have.


 --- stefkeB ---

Post a reply to this message

"cadman" <cad### [at] graffitinet> wrote in message
news:3c322fb7$1@news.povray.org...
> Two or three questions for you to help guide me with the next version of
> AutoCAD2POV:
>
> 1)    When exporting solid models:  A very good mesh representation with
> more modeling options (i.e. fillets, chamfers, etc of solid objects) or
> actual solid models (union { sphere { xxx } box { xxx } })?
>
> 2)    A separate parser, as it is now, or an interface integrated within
> AutoCAD itself, perhaps with a GUI extension to POV?
>
> 3)    Any requests?
>

I'd agree with StefkeB, excepting that, since Autocad2pov is lisp-based,
something working fully within Autocad would probably be better.

Would love to see Icad2pov devloped more - especially some way of adding
booleans to it using the power of Povray. But, perhaps, this has already
been discussed before - and I really don't have any new suggestion  on
implementing it at present.

Good luck, though, FWIW.

-Anoop

Post a reply to this message

I agree, the LISP is a little too hard to work with.  I will probably
implement the lisp functions as an ARX application this time.

This though, makes it difficult for IntelliCAD.  Does anyone know where to
get documentation on IntelliCAD's ARX/ADS implementation?  This would allow
me to try and incorporate (partially, at least) CSG in IntelliCAD.  I
understand that there is now a solid modeler for ICAD, but it costs (which
seems to go against the entire philosophy behing ICAD).  Anyway...any
direction is appreciated.

"anoop" <man### [at] yahoocom> wrote in message
news:3c36d400@news.povray.org...
> "cadman" <cad### [at] graffitinet> wrote in message
> news:3c322fb7$1@news.povray.org...
> > Two or three questions for you to help guide me with the next version of
> > AutoCAD2POV:
> >
> > 1)    When exporting solid models:  A very good mesh representation with
> > more modeling options (i.e. fillets, chamfers, etc of solid objects) or
> > actual solid models (union { sphere { xxx } box { xxx } })?
> >
> > 2)    A separate parser, as it is now, or an interface integrated within
> > AutoCAD itself, perhaps with a GUI extension to POV?
> >
> > 3)    Any requests?
> >
>
> I'd agree with StefkeB, excepting that, since Autocad2pov is lisp-based,
> something working fully within Autocad would probably be better.
>
> Would love to see Icad2pov devloped more - especially some way of adding
> booleans to it using the power of Povray. But, perhaps, this has already
> been discussed before - and I really don't have any new suggestion  on
> implementing it at present.
>
> Good luck, though, FWIW.
>
> -Anoop
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Could you give me an example of what you would like to see?  I'm starting
work on the texture module.
>
> Some easy to set up texturing? The more structured the output, the more
use
> it will have.
>
>
>  --- stefkeB ---
>
>

Post a reply to this message