|
|
I've lately noticed some really odd behavior in 3.7 ("odd" as compared to 3.62.)
Max_trace_level seems to be completely OFF or ON now, when its value is changed
between 1 and 2 (or anything higher than 2.) In other words, a value of 2
produces the same visual result as setting it to its maximum value, or so it
seems. The other odd thing is that the render statistics always return a 'Max
Level' of only 1, regardless of the max_trace_level setting or the number of
semi-transparent overlapping objects in a scene.
(This is in Windows XP, on a single_core AMD machine, using 32-bit v3.7 sse2.)
Here's a small test scene, with a switch for rendering in 3.62 vs. 3.7. Just
semi-transparent nested spheres.
----
// The switch...
#declare version_to_use = 2; // 1 for v3.62, 2 for v3.7
#if(version_to_use = 1)
global_settings{max_trace_level 5 assumed_gamma 2.2}
background {rgb .7}
#declare C=1;
#while(C<=40)
sphere{0,1
scale .1 + .20*C
pigment{rgbt <.1,1,.1,.99>}
}
#declare C=C+1;
#end
#else
#end
#if(version_to_use = 2)
#version 3.7;
global_settings{max_trace_level 2 assumed_gamma srgb}
background {srgb .7}
#declare C=1;
#while(C<=40)
sphere{0,1
scale .1 + .20*C
pigment{srgbt <.1,1,.1,.99>}
}
#declare C=C+1;
#end
#else
#end
// for both versions...
camera {
perspective
location <1, 1, -25>
look_at <0, 0, 0>
right x*image_width/image_height
angle 67
}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
Kenneth <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> #declare C=1;
> #while(C<=40)
> sphere{0,1
> scale .1 + .20*C
> pigment{rgbt <.1,1,.1,.99>}
> }
> #declare C=C+1;
> #end
> #else
> #end
POV-Ray 3.7 does not increase the recursion count when the object has
an ior of 1 (ie. the direction of the ray doesn't change.)
If you give those spheres an ior different from 1, you should get the
behavior you expect.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
James Holsenback <nom### [at] nonecom> wrote:
> On 04/06/2014 06:26 PM, Kenneth wrote:
> > Some of these haven't yet made it into the
> > new documentation or wiki.
>
> so this is just a generalized dig ... right? (lol) or is it a reference
> to the max_intersections issue you reported in p.d.inbuilt? btw ...
> corrected it!
Yeah, I'm guilty. :-P Thanks for the quick correction!
Post a reply to this message
|
|