 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
yesbird wrote:
> On 05/10/2025 01:19, Bald Eagle wrote:
> > Just for kicks, I searched Thingiverse for Povray . .
> Chainmaker is rather interesting ...
>
> Btw, Bill, I need your advice. I am working on online viewer of math
> objects (screenshot attached):
> https://mathview.yesbird.online/
> and now it has export only to OBJ.
>
> Is it worth adding a POV exporter to it, taking in account that POV-Ray
> already has a powerful library for generating math surfaces ?
Well,
All I can say is that although we have things like parametric, isosurface, and
polynomial - what we don't have is a visual modeler for such things.
There does exist MathMod - which can be quite cryptic, and Desmos - which can
help visualize equations. But neither have any sort of export feature.
I'm a fan of the mathematical objects - it's probably one of my favorite things
to play with and render - but after over a dozen years of experience, I'd say
that there are usually only a few select shapes that have real, broad utility.
sphere, cylinder, torus, Dupin cyclide, etc.
Now, on the other end of the spectrum, when you need a specialized shape, and it
has to have very exacting dimensions and attributes, then parametrics and
implicit isosurfaces are probably the only things that will fit the bill -
especially when combined with surface displacement.
And those things can be VERY difficult to visualize.
I really like what you're doing, and there are things that I would want, and
would be great to experiment with. But I don't know what sort of workload is
necessary to make them happen, or what other projects you have to wrap up.
So, ultimately, I'd say that you're going to have to decide for yourself.
We can discuss this more, but I'll leave you with all of that to think about.
- BW
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/09/2025 00:27, yesbird wrote:
> Finally, after two sleepless nights I finished a web application that
> converts obj, fbx, glb, gltf, stl formats to mesh2:
> https://povlab.yesbird.online/all2pov
>
> I tested it only on a limited number of files, so some issues
> (especially related to displaying a model) are possible, testing now in
> progress. Please send any kind of feedback: bug reports, suggestions,
> requests to implement, etc.
Well done on the initiative, but like others here, I can't convert OBJ
files. My OBJ files are fine. With my silly Perl script, conversion to
POV works fine.
I think you still have some work to do to refine all this;
ps: yes, my Firefox 143.0.4-64 is compatible with WebGL 1 & 2.
--
kurtz le pirate
compagnie de la banquise
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/10/2025 12:34, kurtz le pirate wrote:
> Well done on the initiative, but like others here, I can't convert OBJ
> files. My OBJ files are fine. With my silly Perl script, conversion to
> POV works fine.
>
> I think you still have some work to do to refine all this;
Thanks for feedback, could you please provide a little bit more
details - why can't you convert them ? And who else can't ?
Please send me your OBJ and content of _console_ tab (F12).
The project is in beta state, so debug information is highly
appreciated.
--
YB
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/10/2025 12:34, kurtz le pirate wrote:
> I think you still have some work to do to refine all this;
Sure, the reason of OBJ loading issues was lack of 'mtl' file,
OBJ materials is not supported yes, will implement it later.
I made a fix to just ignore them.
PS: Frog is nice ! (attached)
--
YB
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'frog_web.png' (173 KB)
Download 'frog_pov.png' (36 KB)
Preview of image 'frog_web.png'
Preview of image 'frog_pov.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 30/09/2025 12:07, Mr wrote:
> I think you should look at GIS packages (QGis/OpenSceneGraph...), ...Sorry for
off-topic, but I read that you are working with Blender
(POV@Ble). I have idea about effective conversion from Blender to
POV-Ray: If only Blender can work with glTF or GLB file's .extras
property that can store arbitrary JSON content, then we can use it
to store material name and then convert it to POV with my converter.
It's possible not to use a web-based GUI version, but to create a
command line utility running under node.js.
We can use for the start this impressive materials collection - the
royal gift from Mike Miller:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PncYI4G2ssqIXjK1rMej-PgAZ9Gnatz1/view?usp=sharing
What is your opinion ?
--
YB
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'mat.png' (258 KB)
Preview of image 'mat.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Just following up on this,
I think that for your parametric equations, it would be trivial to have an
export option for these, since they are extremely simply to output as quads of
two triangles.
Isosurfaces would be a lot more difficult I think - there has been a long
history of trying to implement meshification of these objects.
Now, perhaps if there are libraries at your disposal for things like convex
hull, it might be easy enough to provide at least that, so that there was some
data for users to experiment with and think about various approaches to more
completely represent such surfaces prior to render phase.
- BW
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
yesbird wrote:
> On 30/09/2025 12:07, Mr wrote:
> > I think you should look at GIS packages (QGis/OpenSceneGraph...), ...Sorry for
off-topic, but I read that you are w
orking with Blender
> (POV@Ble). I have idea about effective conversion from Blender to
> POV-Ray: If only Blender can work with glTF or GLB file's .extras
> property that can store arbitrary JSON content, then we can use it
> to store material name and then convert it to POV with my converter.
>
> It's possible not to use a web-based GUI version, but to create a
> command line utility running under node.js.
>
> We can use for the start this impressive materials collection - the
> royal gift from Mike Miller:
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PncYI4G2ssqIXjK1rMej-PgAZ9Gnatz1/view?usp=sharing
>
> What is your opinion ?
> --
> YB
Your screenshot shows great materials, but I don't understand why not use the
current POV custom code hooks already featured directly in POV@Ble they append
the pov code at top of exported POV files and add the declared textures to the
exported pov objects. A sample library of such pov mats was even made available
in the old wiki and is planned to be shipped again later.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
yesbird wrote:
> On 30/09/2025 12:07, Mr wrote:
> > I think you should look at GIS packages (QGis/OpenSceneGraph...), ...Sorry for
off-topic, but I read that you are w
orking with Blender
> (POV@Ble). I have idea about effective conversion from Blender to
> POV-Ray: If only Blender can work with glTF or GLB file's .extras
> property that can store arbitrary JSON content, then we can use it
> to store material name and then convert it to POV with my converter.
>
> It's possible not to use a web-based GUI version, but to create a
> command line utility running under node.js.
>
> We can use for the start this impressive materials collection - the
> royal gift from Mike Miller:
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PncYI4G2ssqIXjK1rMej-PgAZ9Gnatz1/view?usp=sharing
>
> What is your opinion ?
> --
> YB
From what I understand of your idea, it would aim to provide a totally different
pipeline than POV@Ble, and it would actually not consist of a POV@Ble
modification, but rather an addition to the e.g. gltf exporter. I can help you
reach out to the relevant dev if you want to make him such a proposition, but it
should be really refined as he's like one of the 5 most busy Blender devs.
(sweat); and also his code one of the highest standard.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 06/10/2025 18:07, Mr wrote:
> Your screenshot shows great materials, but I don't understand why not use the
> current POV custom code hooks already featured directly in POV@Ble they append
> the pov code at top of exported POV files and add the declared textures to the
> exported pov objects. A sample library of such pov mats was even made available
> in the old wiki and is planned to be shipped again l### [at] er If you find it more simple
and POV@Ble work good - then, yes, this is a
solution. I am always looking for different approaches, to choose
the best.
--
YB
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 06/10/2025 18:16, Mr wrote:
> From what I understand of your idea, it would aim to provide a totally different
> pipeline than POV@Ble, and it would actually not consist of a POV@Ble
> modification, but rather an addition to the e.g. gltf exporter. I can help you
> reach out to the relevant dev if you want to make him such a proposition, but it
> should be really refined as he's like one of the 5 most busy Blender devs.
> (sweat); and also his code one of the highest standard.Yes, exactly, this solution
has no relation to POV@Ble, it's some kind
of alternative. This idea came to me only this morning, so I need
to think hard about details and look up the modern Blender interface to
make proposition well.
Many thanks for your support, I will get back to you in 1-2 days.
--
YB
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
