mic### [at] enterprisenet (Michael Kent) wrote:

>Hi Everyone,
>
>Well, lots of ideas and opinions have been put forward here, and I
>would like to gather them all together before changing the rules for
>POVRayCity.  The main issues, as I see it are :-
>
>1: Scale.  Is 1 unit =25m to tight?  If so what about 1 unit = 10 m,
>or  1 unit = 1 m.?

I would suggest 1 unit = 1 [foot, meter, yard, whatever]. One to one
makes it easier to calculate in your head.

>2: Detail level.  I understand and share the concerns about the amount
>of detail, and how this could affect rendering as the city grows.
>Especially, as has been mentioned, when people start to grow trees
>etc.  Personally I favour the idea of "distance from camera" related
>detail levels,( as described by Fran Firman) but it would have to be
>done in such a manner that relatively inexperienced contributors could
>understand.  I also think that the "distance would have to be
>definable in one place so that people can easily tweak it to suit.

It looks like there have been a number of reasonable suggestions so
far. 

>3: The Plane (grass in the basement)  I'll cut a hole in it, and give
>a box as a standard floor which people can cut through and build
>around as they wish.

A Box sounds good. This would allow for differing 'lawns', basements,
and even underground utility runs.

>4: Are the plots the right size ?  At current scale they are about 225
>m square.

If you change the scale you might want to change the plots to a
'round' number, i.e. 200m sq., again just to make calculations 'in the
head' easier. Although the present system gives you nice even
coordinates yet still leaves space for the 'roads'.

>5: It has been pointed out that excluding image maps will be a real
>pain for certain things.  How best can these be controlled so as to
>avoid duplicate file names?

As has been suggested elsewhere go with a subdirectory structure for
each plot. I would suggest using first initial, middle initial, then
last name, i.e. 'jsfetzik' in my case. It is less likely then just
initials to repeat, but still gives things the 'personal' touch that
coordinate based names would not.

I would also suggest that the same naming convention be used for a
persons objects to be consistent, i.e. jsfetzik_object1.

>6: There are several include files which people heve written and
>released for public use.  I am happy for these to be included in the
>baseline to save people duplicating them, and to make it easier for
>everyone in general.
>I am happy to add anything that a contributor asks for, as long as the
>author has no objections, assuming that it is not too vast.

This sounds like a good idea. I am sure many of these will get used.
Tell everyone that you will take requests. If more then 2 people
request the same include I would consider it for addition. You might
want to make the inclusion conditional in the main file so that
someone can 'turn them off' by just changing one setting.


>Good ideas are always welcome, and may be stolen if not nailed down
>:-))

Might I suggest some form of macro for a plots coordinates. So that
you can relocate a plot without needing to can the 'residents' files.
I am not experienced enough with POV to know how easy or useful this
would be, but it sure could save headaches later.

Post a reply to this message

John S. Fetzik wrote:
> 
> >5: It has been pointed out that excluding image maps will be a real
> >pain for certain things.  How best can these be controlled so as to
> >avoid duplicate file names?
> 
> As has been suggested elsewhere go with a subdirectory structure for
> each plot. I would suggest using first initial, middle initial, then
> last name, i.e. 'jsfetzik' in my case. It is less likely then just
> initials to repeat, but still gives things the 'personal' touch that
> coordinate based names would not.
> 
> I would also suggest that the same naming convention be used for a
> persons objects to be consistent, i.e. jsfetzik_object1.
> 

Bit of a problem with naming the objects with your initials. I think
some of the newbies might be using modellers and don't have a clue as to
how to edit pov files, ie. they did'nt bother reading some of the pov
docs because they are too lazy ;-), so they won't be able to name the
objects themselves unless their modeller allows them to name the objects
within itself...am I making any sense?

Cheers, Matthew

Post a reply to this message

> Bit of a problem with naming the objects with your initials. I think
> some of the newbies might be using modellers and don't have a clue as to
> how to edit pov files, ie. they did'nt bother reading some of the pov
> docs because they are too lazy ;-)

Hey!!!  I resemble that remark!

Jerome "I Love ED" O'Neil

Post a reply to this message

Starting with moray?!  I started and still use raw pov code.  Moray is too
confusing.

~Kardal~

Matthew Mc Clement wrote:

> John S. Fetzik wrote:
> >
> > >5: It has been pointed out that excluding image maps will be a real
> > >pain for certain things.  How best can these be controlled so as to
> > >avoid duplicate file names?
> >
> > As has been suggested elsewhere go with a subdirectory structure for
> > each plot. I would suggest using first initial, middle initial, then
> > last name, i.e. 'jsfetzik' in my case. It is less likely then just
> > initials to repeat, but still gives things the 'personal' touch that
> > coordinate based names would not.
> >
> > I would also suggest that the same naming convention be used for a
> > persons objects to be consistent, i.e. jsfetzik_object1.
> >
>
> Bit of a problem with naming the objects with your initials. I think
> some of the newbies might be using modellers and don't have a clue as to
> how to edit pov files, ie. they did'nt bother reading some of the pov
> docs because they are too lazy ;-), so they won't be able to name the
> objects themselves unless their modeller allows them to name the objects
> within itself...am I making any sense?
>
> Cheers, Matthew

Post a reply to this message

Kardal wrote:
> 
> Starting with moray?!  I started and still use raw pov code.  Moray is too
> confusing.
> 
> ~Kardal~
> 

Yup, you're right, moray is to confusing. I myself tried and then
stopped using it almost immediately. Can't get used to the interface.
Now, Amapi, thats a modeller that has an awesome interface and is free
for a whole year under Linux(generous shareware??). Unfortunately it
only exports pov meshes....well, theres nothing to it, emacs, here I
come!!!!

Cheers, Matthew

Post a reply to this message

Matthew Mc Clement wrote:

> Kardal wrote:
> >
> > Starting with moray?!  I started and still use raw pov code.  Moray is too
> > confusing.
>
> Yup, you're right, moray is to [sic] confusing. I myself tried and then
> stopped using it almost immediately. Can't get used to the interface.

Obviously you've never seen AutoCAD.  THAT's confusing.  Moray is the
least-confusing CAD interface I've ever seen, and I'm very surprised to find
this opinion voiced.  What is it that you find so confusing?  (I'm a
Moray-for-Windows beta-tester, BTW.)

jbm!

Post a reply to this message

Brook Monroe wrote:
> 
> Matthew Mc Clement wrote:
> 
> > Yup, you're right, moray is to [sic] confusing. I myself tried and then
> > stopped using it almost immediately. Can't get used to the interface.
> 
> Obviously you've never seen AutoCAD.  THAT's confusing.  Moray is the
> least-confusing CAD interface I've ever seen, and I'm very surprised to find
> this opinion voiced.  What is it that you find so confusing?  (I'm a
> Moray-for-Windows beta-tester, BTW.)
> 
> jbm!

Well, I just can't get used to the interface. It bugs me for some
reason. If you run Linux try Amapi(http://www.yonowat.com). The
interface is totaly original, and I have been using it for about 6
months now, and I guess I've just gotten to used to it. I can't even use
basic modellers like Breeze Designer, Povlab, GUM, just to name a few.
PovsB is about the only windows modeller I can use. Of the dos modellers
I can use MNM but thats USE, I am by no means a pro at it. In fact I
have trouble with most modellers. The ones I can use best are Amapi(of
course :)), Truespace 2, Extreme 3D, Infini-D(only a little), PovsB and
MNM. Imagine, 3DS, Lightwave just seem too confusing for some reason or
another....which is a pitty as Truespace is the only modeller that
supports reasonably easy and good animation effects...sigh!

Cheers, Matthew

P.S. I have tried Autocad 14 and yeah, you're right, it is a bit
confusing ;-). Microstation is nice, but even the student licenses are a

Post a reply to this message

Matthew Mc Clement wrote:

> Well, I just can't get used to the interface. It bugs me for some
> reason. If you run Linux try Amapi(http://www.yonowat.com).

Nope.  Can't run Linux.  Too used to MS Office.  (Weak reasoning, perhaps, but by
now it's a habit.)

> The interface is totaly original,

Actually, I find that a frightening thought. :)

> and I have been using it for about 6
> months now, and I guess I've just gotten to used to it. I can't even use
> basic modellers like Breeze Designer, Povlab, GUM, just to name a few.

I'll agree with you there.

> PovsB is about the only windows modeller I can use. Of the dos modellers
> I can use MNM but thats USE, I am by no means a pro at it. In fact I
> have trouble with most modellers. The ones I can use best are Amapi(of
> course :)), Truespace 2, Extreme 3D, Infini-D(only a little), PovsB and
> MNM. Imagine, 3DS, Lightwave just seem too confusing for some reason or
> another....which is a pitty as Truespace is the only modeller that
> supports reasonably easy and good animation effects...sigh!
>

I never could figure out Truespace's UI.  I tried it for several versions and I
still couldn't figure out how to do the simplest thing.  Lightwave I had more
success at, except for getting the lighting right.

Of course, I program for a living.  I don't do rendering for a living.  (And some
say you can tell that from my work.)

jbm!

Post a reply to this message

Brook Monroe wrote:

> Matthew Mc Clement wrote:
>
> > Kardal wrote:
> > >
> > > Starting with moray?!  I started and still use raw pov code.  Moray is too
> > > confusing.
> >
> > Yup, you're right, moray is to [sic] confusing. I myself tried and then
> > stopped using it almost immediately. Can't get used to the interface.
>
> Obviously you've never seen AutoCAD.  THAT's confusing.  Moray is the
> least-confusing CAD interface I've ever seen, and I'm very surprised to find
> this opinion voiced.  What is it that you find so confusing?  (I'm a
> Moray-for-Windows beta-tester, BTW.)
>
> jbm!

  I've been spoiled by the powerful and expensive CADKey 97 (www.cadkey.com).
Unfortunatley, I can't use it for pov because there is no cheap direct, or even
indirect, way to export to pov.  It exports Autocad DXF files, but I haven't found
a good DXF to Anything I Can Use converter.

I'll have to wait and see what the windows version looks like.

~Kardal~

Post a reply to this message

Kardal wrote:

> Brook Monroe wrote:
>
> I've been spoiled by the powerful and expensive CADKey 97 (www.cadkey.com).

Oh, ~expensive~.  Well, I was going to look, but I can't afford expensive right now.

> Unfortunatley, I can't use it for pov because there is no cheap direct, or even
> indirect, way to export to pov.  It exports Autocad DXF files, but I haven't found
> a good DXF to Anything I Can Use converter.
>

Any of the DXF-to-POV converters I've seen produce less than useful results because
you can't tag different parts of the object with different textures--everything comes
out as a monolithic mesh.  That's not much use when you're rendering an F-14 or
what-have-you.  The Win32 version still sports the 4-view interface, which is what
attracted me to Moray in the first place.  (That, and the lack of that annoying
"command-line" thing that AutoCad and MNM do.)

jbm!

Post a reply to this message