I found it months ago. Ran a few examples to create .pov files
and forget about it. Yesterday I thought of a use (on artiii
below) but now I can't find the program on my disk to give
credit. This is not critical as I will be redoing the scene with
my own buildings but if anyone has an idea please post it. 


-- 
<blink>-------please--don't-----------------</blink>

http://www.giwersworld.org/artii/
http://www.giwersworld.org/artiii/

Finally up on 99/06/22 updated 06/30

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (1 KB)

Matt Giwer wrote:
> 
>         I found it months ago. Ran a few examples to create .pov files
> and forget about it. Yesterday I thought of a use (on artiii
> below) but now I can't find the program on my disk to give
> credit. This is not critical as I will be redoing the scene with
> my own buildings but if anyone has an idea please post it.
> 
> --
> <blink>-------please--don't-----------------</blink>
> 
> http://www.giwersworld.org/artii/
> http://www.giwersworld.org/artiii/
> 
> Finally up on 99/06/22 updated 06/30

Colefax has a city generating include file that is beyond impressive.

http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lakes/1434/

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:
> 
> Matt Giwer wrote:
> >
> >         I found it months ago. Ran a few examples to create .pov files
> > and forget about it. Yesterday I thought of a use (on artiii
> > below) but now I can't find the program on my disk to give
> > credit. This is not critical as I will be redoing the scene with
> > my own buildings but if anyone has an idea please post it.

> Colefax has a city generating include file that is beyond impressive.
 
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lakes/1434/

	Not that one. This is a big cities only file. And this one lacks
textures and such. If you looked at the results on artiii below I
did the focal blur to cover the lack of texturing. (And that is
quick and dirty.) 

	I will take a look at his though. I doubt it will be good enough
for my needs in this scene. Meaning I need something that looks
real close up so I don't need the blurring to cover it. 

	Speaking of which since you post like a pro, that image is from
+y looking down at 0*y. I want to rotate the view say 20 degrees
to induce a feeling of vertico. But the parser says the vista
buffer can't deal with the obvious rotations from the camera
defs. Any suggestion? 

-- 
<blink>-------please--don't-----------------</blink>

http://www.giwersworld.org/artii/
http://www.giwersworld.org/artiii/

Finally up on 99/06/22 updated 06/30

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (1 KB)

I know it is presumptuous of me to say but Mr. Colfax appears to
create things for those who can not do for themselves, perhaps
just showing off. 

	Taking the city for example, that would have made a great city
around 1920 or even 1940 maybe in some places but it still misses
the surrounding farmlands. And for today it certainly misses the
suburbs. If I wanted an Oakie city under a bubble in space I
would use it or the other. But as is, no. It is not realistic in
the least today.

-- 
<blink>-------please--don't-----------------</blink>

http://www.giwersworld.org/artii/
http://www.giwersworld.org/artiii/

Finally up on 99/06/22 updated 06/30

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (1 KB)

Matt Giwer <mgi### [at] giwersworldorg> wrote:
: 	Taking the city for example, that would have made a great city
: around 1920 or even 1940 maybe in some places but it still misses
: the surrounding farmlands. And for today it certainly misses the
: suburbs. If I wanted an Oakie city under a bubble in space I
: would use it or the other. But as is, no. It is not realistic in
: the least today.

  No include file will save you from having to think.

  If you want different areas in the city with different type of builndings,
why don't you just create many types of cities and put them together?

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Matt Giwer heeft geschreven in bericht <377AF2E1.F732B580@giwersworld.org>...
> I found it months ago. .......

Citygen by Dale Cieslak

http://members.tripod.com/~DCieslak

ingo
--
Met dank aan de muze met het glazen oog.

Post a reply to this message

The only city generator (other than the Colefax one) I can think of is
Citygen by D. Cieslak. I find it quite impressive though I wish I could
define my own buildings.

http://members.tripod.com/~DCieslak/util.html

Gilles

Matt Giwer wrote:

>         I found it months ago. Ran a few examples to create .pov files
> and forget about it. Yesterday I thought of a use (on artiii
> below) but now I can't find the program on my disk to give
> credit. This is not critical as I will be redoing the scene with
> my own buildings but if anyone has an idea please post it.
>
> --
> <blink>-------please--don't-----------------</blink>
>
> http://www.giwersworld.org/artii/
> http://www.giwersworld.org/artiii/
>
> Finally up on 99/06/22 updated 06/30

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote:

>   No include file will save you from having to think.
> 
>   If you want different areas in the city with different type of builndings,
> why don't you just create many types of cities and put them together?

	That is what I said I would have to do. I have missed your
point.

-- 
<blink>-------please--don't-----------------</blink>

http://www.giwersworld.org/artii/
http://www.giwersworld.org/artiii/

Finally up on 99/06/22 updated 06/30

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (1 KB)

ingo wrote:
> 
> Matt Giwer heeft geschreven in bericht <377AF2E1.F732B580@giwersworld.org>...
> > I found it months ago. .......
> 
> Citygen by Dale Cieslak
> 
> http://members.tripod.com/~DCieslak

	That's it, thanks!
 
> ingo
> --
> Met dank aan de muze met het glazen oog.

-- 
<blink>-------please--don't-----------------</blink>

http://www.giwersworld.org/artii/
http://www.giwersworld.org/artiii/

Finally up on 99/06/22 updated 06/30

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (1 KB)

Gilles Tran wrote:
> 
> The only city generator (other than the Colefax one) I can think of is
> Citygen by D. Cieslak. I find it quite impressive though I wish I could
> define my own buildings.
> 
> http://members.tripod.com/~DCieslak/util.html

	And thank you, that is the right one. 

-- 
<blink>-------please--don't-----------------</blink>

http://www.giwersworld.org/artii/
http://www.giwersworld.org/artiii/

Finally up on 99/06/22 updated 06/30

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (1 KB)

My cityrich.jpg submission to the IRTC for Imaginary Places has a random
block generator.  You create the buildings you want placed in blocks and
then layout the blocks.

I use the same code to place people on the streets, boats in the water,
trees along the bank, and the tents in the marketplace.

It uses a "sparse" factor that allows you to adjust how dense the buildings
get laid out on a particular block.

See other cities I've generated with this technique by following the links
on the city gallery page:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lab/6080/citygall.htm

Robert J Becraft
aka cas### [at] aolcom

Post a reply to this message

Matt Giwer <mgi### [at] giwersworldorg> wrote in message
news:377B0EE0.7D92E08E@giwersworld.org...
> I know it is presumptuous of me to say but Mr. Colfax appears to
> create things for those who can not do for themselves, perhaps
> just showing off.

I would hardly have called him a show-off, more like someone with the skill,
imagination and generosity of provide his good quality and often unique
include files to the public.  Though who knows...

/\/\/\//

Post a reply to this message

Matthew Bennett <ben### [at] btinternetcom> wrote:
: I would hardly have called him a show-off, more like someone with the skill,
: imagination and generosity of provide his good quality and often unique
: include files to the public.  Though who knows...

  I think that the (pov)world would not be the same anymore without Chris'
include files. It would be a whole lot more boring...

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Matt Giwer wrote:
> 
>         I know it is presumptuous of me to say but Mr. Colfax appears to
> create things for those who can not do for themselves, perhaps
> just showing off.
> 
>         Taking the city for example, that would have made a great city
> around 1920 or even 1940 maybe in some places but it still misses
> the surrounding farmlands. And for today it certainly misses the
> suburbs. If I wanted an Oakie city under a bubble in space I
> would use it or the other. But as is, no. It is not realistic in
> the least today.

Oh, the slander... (and you misspelt my name to boot!).

Well, Mr. Giuer/Giwer, I do believe this is the first time someone has
actually taken offence at my offerings.  With my honour thus slighted,
perhaps I could grant myself the right of reply?  It is indeed true that
many of my projects are the result of other POV users' suggestions,
requests, and/or challenges, although in my defence might I say that my
efforts in documenting and distributing the files show I'm seeking a
little more than "ooh's" and "aah's"?

Case in point, I started the City Generator after suggestions by, and
collaborations with, Scott McDonald well over 18 months ago.  Oddly
enough, the original version I created for POV-Ray 3.0 included a
selection of red-roofed, white-picket fenced suburbs, and Scott designed
a series of high-rise buildings for his own scenes (see
http://www.canuck.com/~jimm/graphicp.htm).

Once POV-Ray 3.1 was released with macros, file I/O, etc., I rewrote the
file and redesigned the technique used to assemble the city.  My
intention by splitting the system into Include, Macro, and Object files
was to allow users to design their own custom cities at various levels. 
The "out of date" building objects you derided were simply created (as
all my sample images/animations are) to illustrate various features of
the system in order to give users some idea of what might be possible. 
They certainly are not meant to indicate the full extent of the files.

If you wished, you could create building object files (as others have
already done) for futuristic, contemporary, or period cities, and if you
really wanted to you could create a modified city macro file that
created buildings at various levels of complexity depending on their
distance from the camera, or to change the type of buildings as you got
further from the city centre.

Oh well, what with this and the current Yahoo-GeoCities furore it's
probably best I pack up my files and retire under a rock somewhere...
(not bloody likely!)  But thanks anyway for keeping me on my toes - now
I'll just have to work on something to really show off!

Post a reply to this message

Chris Colefax wrote:

> I'll just have to work on something to really show off!

I can hardly wait. Keep showing off! The more, the better :)

Margus

Post a reply to this message

Chris Colefax wrote in message <377CCF9C.E5CDBC17@ledanet.com.au>...
>Matt Giwer wrote:
>>
>>         I know it is presumptuous of me to say but Mr. Colfax appears to
>> create things for those who can not do for themselves, perhaps
>> just showing off.
>>
>>         Taking the city for example, that would have made a great city
>> around 1920 or even 1940 maybe in some places but it still misses
>> the surrounding farmlands. And for today it certainly misses the
>> suburbs. If I wanted an Oakie city under a bubble in space I
>> would use it or the other. But as is, no. It is not realistic in
>> the least today.
>
>Oh, the slander... (and you misspelt my name to boot!).
>
>Well, Mr. Giuer/Giwer, I do believe this is the first time someone has
>actually taken offence at my offerings.  With my honour thus slighted,

Maybe he's just jealous ;-)

OK, no need to start a flame war it was JUST A JOKE!
Now back to on topic stuff here... I was looking through your includes
libraries etc etc and noticed something about particles systems.  I was
thinking... have you thought about making a particle media system based on
combining the particle systems you currently have with spheres of media for
the particles?  I talked to Peter Popov about this a while ago and
unfortunately haven't had the time to get the spcifications to him (sorry
Peter), but MAX has a really good system based on this... My question is, do
you think this would be too slow in POV-Ray?

--
Lance.


---
For the latest 3D Studio MAX plug-ins, images and much more, go to:
The Zone - http://come.to/the.zone
For a totally different experience, visit my Chroma Key Website:
Colorblind - http://listen.to/colorblind

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 3 Jul 1999 01:11:58 +1000, "Lance Birch" <lan### [at] usanet>
wrote:

>Maybe he's just jealous ;-)
>
>OK, no need to start a flame war it was JUST A JOKE!
>Now back to on topic stuff here... I was looking through your includes
>libraries etc etc and noticed something about particles systems.  I was
>thinking... have you thought about making a particle media system based on
>combining the particle systems you currently have with spheres of media for
>the particles?  I talked to Peter Popov about this a while ago and
>unfortunately haven't had the time to get the spcifications to him (sorry
>Peter), but MAX has a really good system based on this... My question is, do
>you think this would be too slow in POV-Ray?

Hey, no sweat :)

It could be rendered really fast, in fact, if POV's media didn't mess
up with intersecting container objects that much. I'll try to make a
speed (and quality) comparison test using 1000 media in one container
vs. 1000 separate containers... guess which one'll be faster. If the
latter works, the particle system might as well be done. BTW this is
one of the major items on my to-do list for this vacation (after July
15), as long as a .df3 creating utility and a fractal patch for POV
(anyone working on any of those?)

And Chris, I have had some thoughts about this particle system that I
haven't discussed with Lance (sorry, Lance). If you consider the
project worthy we might as well share some ideas.


Peter Popov
ICQ: 15002700

Post a reply to this message

I've tried to model smoke with multiple containers (not that many, a few 1000s)
but it was pretty slow. A particle system might need many more. I have doubts
about the speed of this method. Perhaps you can give a few stats?

Margus

> 
> It could be rendered really fast, in fact, if POV's media didn't mess
> up with intersecting container objects that much. I'll try to make a
> speed (and quality) comparison test using 1000 media in one container
> vs. 1000 separate containers... guess which one'll be faster. If the
> latter works, the particle system might as well be done.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 02 Jul 1999 20:19:35 +0300, Margus Ramst <mar### [at] peakeduee>
wrote:

>I've tried to model smoke with multiple containers (not that many, a few 1000s)
>but it was pretty slow. A particle system might need many more. I have doubts
>about the speed of this method. Perhaps you can give a few stats?
>
>Margus

Preliminary tests show that multiple particles is faster than multiple
media, and with better quality. For 100 particles render times were
like 2 vs. 5 minutes. Of course there's the problem with the high
max_trace_level and max_intersections that you might need...

I'll post more precise stats, test code, example images/anim tomorrow
(gimme some time to trace them)


Peter Popov
ICQ: 15002700

Post a reply to this message

I especially liked City Richmond. You going to remain at geocities
despite the TOS there Robert B. (and Chris C. too)?
As was said a person can certainly make ones own customizations to C.C.s
CityGenerator Include, not a deadend sort of thing in the least.

Post a reply to this message

On 2 Jul 1999 01:20:16 -0400, Nieminen Mika <war### [at] cctutfi> wrote:

>Matthew Bennett <ben### [at] btinternetcom> wrote:
>: I would hardly have called him a show-off, more like someone with the skill,
>: imagination and generosity of provide his good quality and often unique
>: include files to the public.  Though who knows...
>
>  I think that the (pov)world would not be the same anymore without Chris'
>include files. It would be a whole lot more boring...
>
I'd probably be absent too (so that might be one benefit). After all,
a good 90% of almost all of my images are probably actually Chris's
work!


Cheers,

Cliff Bowman
Why not pay my 3D Dr Who site a visit at http://www.who3d.cwc.net/
PS change ".duffcom" to ".net" if replying via e-mail

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 03 Jul 1999 00:41:32 +1000, Chris Colefax
<cco### [at] ledanetcomau> wrote:
[snip]

Good post, you even managed to avoid retaliating on an offended and/or
offensive manner. Remarkably "adult" for Usenet these days.

>Oh well, what with this and the current Yahoo-GeoCities furore it's
>probably best I pack up my files and retire under a rock somewhere...

I know you're joking, if only because you know POV users worldwide
would hunt you down like a dog.. I can almost hear the torch-carrying
villagers now "Upload Colefax - this is your last chance!" <g>

>(not bloody likely!)  But thanks anyway for keeping me on my toes - now
>I'll just have to work on something to really show off!

Hehehe. Bet you can't beat what you've given us so far into a cocked
hat <how do I do a grin THAT wide?>


Cheers,

Cliff Bowman
Why not pay my 3D Dr Who site a visit at http://www.who3d.cwc.net/
PS change ".duffcom" to ".net" if replying via e-mail

Post a reply to this message

I (somewhat impetuously) wrote:
> I'll just have to work on something to really show off!

to which Margus Ramst replied:
> I can hardly wait. Keep showing off! The more, the better :)

and Cliff Bowman generously wrote:
> Good post, you even managed to avoid retaliating on an offended and/or
> offensive manner. Remarkably "adult" for Usenet these days.
> 
> I know you're joking, if only because you know POV users worldwide
> would hunt you down like a dog.. I can almost hear the torch-carrying
> villagers now "Upload Colefax - this is your last chance!" <g>
> 
> Hehehe. Bet you can't beat what you've given us so far into a cocked
> hat <how do I do a grin THAT wide?>

Thank you, Margus and Cliff - to be honest, my first response to
Matthias' post was a wide smile of my own...but being ever poised for a
fall, I couldn't resist a reply! (although the comparison to a hunted
dog is rather disturbing, Cliff...trust an Englishman, what!)

Post a reply to this message

Lance Birch wrote:
> 
> Now back to on topic stuff here... I was looking through your includes
> libraries etc etc and noticed something about particles systems.  I was
> thinking... have you thought about making a particle media system based on
> combining the particle systems you currently have with spheres of media for
> the particles?  I talked to Peter Popov about this a while ago and
> unfortunately haven't had the time to get the spcifications to him (sorry
> Peter), but MAX has a really good system based on this... My question is, do
> you think this would be too slow in POV-Ray?

to which Peter Popov replied:
> 
> It could be rendered really fast, in fact, if POV's media didn't mess
> up with intersecting container objects that much. I'll try to make a
> speed (and quality) comparison test using 1000 media in one container
> vs. 1000 separate containers... guess which one'll be faster. If the
> latter works, the particle system might as well be done. BTW this is
> one of the major items on my to-do list for this vacation (after July
> 15), as long as a .df3 creating utility and a fractal patch for POV
> (anyone working on any of those?)
> 
> And Chris, I have had some thoughts about this particle system that I
> haven't discussed with Lance (sorry, Lance). If you consider the
> project worthy we might as well share some ideas.

My plans for the POV-Ray Particle System certainly include media-related
features.  In fact, it is possible to create media-filled particles
using the Liquid Spray include file (as others have already done for
volcanoes, etc.), but while blob containers aren't such a problem they
do not allow for blending individual interiors/media.

One solution, then, might be to create a single blob container which is
filled with multiple media (the centres of the media being located at
the centres of the blob components).  This might improve sampling
results, as the container will be more closely fitted to the size of the
media, and of course you don't have the worry of excessive
max_trace_level's.  Another option might be to exploit the density
files  mentioned - it should be quite possible to output a *.df3 file
based on particle positions/densities, etc., and then (in the same
scene) read this in to create the media.

Of course, if either you, Lance, or you, Peter, (or indeed you,
as-yet-unnamed reader!) wish to regale me with particle system ideas I
am contactable at mailto:cco### [at] geocitiescom (although, No, I haven't
made up my mind about the Yahoo TOS...).  As I may have mentioned it's
not always possible for me to gain access to news.povray.org, so a reply
may be quicker forthcoming if the message is also directed more squarely
in my direction.

Post a reply to this message

Chris Colefax <cco### [at] ledanetcomau> wrote:
: Oh well, what with this and the current Yahoo-GeoCities furore it's
: probably best I pack up my files and retire under a rock somewhere...

  Don't you dare!

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Chris Colefax  wrote:

>I (somewhat impetuously) wrote:
>> I'll just have to work on something to really show off!
>
>to which Margus Ramst replied:
>> I can hardly wait. Keep showing off! The more, the better :)
>
>and Cliff Bowman generously wrote:
>> Good post, you even managed to avoid retaliating on an offended and/or
>> offensive manner. Remarkably "adult" for Usenet these days.
>> 
>> I know you're joking, if only because you know POV users worldwide
>> would hunt you down like a dog.. I can almost hear the torch-carrying
>> villagers now "Upload Colefax - this is your last chance!" <g>
>> 
[snip]
>Thank you, Margus and Cliff - to be honest, my first response to
>Matthias' post was a wide smile of my own...but being ever poised for a
>fall, I couldn't resist a reply! (although the comparison to a hunted
>dog is rather disturbing, Cliff...trust an Englishman, what!)
>
We're certainly on the odd side over here. Our mental hospitals have
the sane people on the inside with the "inmates" wandering the
countryside. We're happier like that overall :)

Back on to topic (or at least a closer approach) it's disheartening to
see something criticised not for a flaw in it but a lack of
understanding. I suspect there are enough people around who've
benefitted from your work that the misconceptions about your include
files "limitations" wouldn't have stood for long.

BTW I finally got an animation I mentioned by e-mail oh - probably a
couple of years ago - into a state where I'm not too embarrased with
it. Although I'm trying out media instead of your lens flare (a recent
modification which I'm still working on) the "title sequence" still
uses your stars, your explosion to blow up out moon, and your clock
modifier all over the place. Saved me hours and hours of time.

Cheers mate :)


Cheers,

Cliff Bowman
Why not pay my 3D Dr Who site a visit at http://www.who3d.cwc.net/
PS change ".duffcom" to ".net" if replying via e-mail

Post a reply to this message

Cliff,

Deinstitutionalisationism is rife here in the colonies as well - but
it's surely a testament to the English character that you can still
laugh about it!

And yes, of course I would love to see your animation: do let me know
when it's available on the web, or to organize sending it (and I'll do
my best to desist from any 'jolly good show, chaps'!).

Yours,

Chris.

---------------
> 
> We're certainly on the odd side over here. Our mental hospitals have
> the sane people on the inside with the "inmates" wandering the
> countryside. We're happier like that overall :)
> 
> Back on to topic (or at least a closer approach) it's disheartening to
> see something criticised not for a flaw in it but a lack of
> understanding. I suspect there are enough people around who've
> benefitted from your work that the misconceptions about your include
> files "limitations" wouldn't have stood for long.
> 
> BTW I finally got an animation I mentioned by e-mail oh - probably a
> couple of years ago - into a state where I'm not too embarrased with
> it. Although I'm trying out media instead of your lens flare (a recent
> modification which I'm still working on) the "title sequence" still
> uses your stars, your explosion to blow up out moon, and your clock
> modifier all over the place. Saved me hours and hours of time.

Post a reply to this message

Chris,

>
>Deinstitutionalisationism is rife here in the colonies as well - but
>it's surely a testament to the English character that you can still
>laugh about it!

When I look all around me - it's laugh or cry!

>And yes, of course I would love to see your animation: do let me know
>when it's available on the web, or to organize sending it (and I'll do
>my best to desist from any 'jolly good show, chaps'!).
>
I actually posted a rather naff (too small) copy to p.b.a. (under the
title "Exploding Moon - bang.avi") and there're two copies (the same
and a much larger, better version where you can SEE the stars!) on my
web site.

I've just about finished reworking the media explosion (takes far too
long to render. Seriously considering returning to your lens flare
add-in for the flammable portion as in some ways it looks better and
it's certainly faster. We'll see...).

I've about sorted out my vortex sequence too - although it's hard to
tell given how long it takes to render (I can't design stuff that's as
efficient as your plugins - my stuff takes weeks to render a few
frames <grr>).


Cheers,

Cliff Bowman
Why not pay my 3D Dr Who site a visit at http://www.who3d.cwc.net/
PS change ".duffcom" to ".net" if replying via e-mail

Post a reply to this message