 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Plain PaperTry this link
http://headline.gamespot.com/news/99_07/23_pc_nvidia/index.html
Looks like the next generation of video boards may start doing some of the
math currently done in POV.
--
Jim
Check out my web site http://www.kressworks.com/
It'll blow your mind (politically), stimulate your senses (artistically)
and provide scientific insights that boggle the mind!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Kress wrote:
>
> Plain PaperTry this link
> http://headline.gamespot.com/news/99_07/23_pc_nvidia/index.html
>
> Looks like the next generation of video boards may start doing some of the
> math currently done in POV.
>
> --
> Jim
>
> Check out my web site http://www.kressworks.com/
> It'll blow your mind (politically), stimulate your senses (artistically)
> and provide scientific insights that boggle the mind!
Sorry Jim but it won't help Pov in this case.
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Really? Even with the onboard shading, lighting, and rendering functions?
Or would a card specific version of POV be required to take care of those
functions?
--
Jim
Check out my web site http://www.kressworks.com/
It'll blow your mind (politically), stimulate your senses (artistically)
and provide scientific insights that boggle the mind!
Ken <tyl### [at] pacbell net> wrote in message
news:379### [at] pacbellnet...
>
>
> Jim Kress wrote:
> >
> > Plain PaperTry this link
> > http://headline.gamespot.com/news/99_07/23_pc_nvidia/index.html
> >
> > Looks like the next generation of video boards may start doing some of
the
> > math currently done in POV.
> >
> > --
> > Jim
> >
> > Check out my web site http://www.kressworks.com/
> > It'll blow your mind (politically), stimulate your senses (artistically)
> > and provide scientific insights that boggle the mind!
>
> Sorry Jim but it won't help Pov in this case.
>
> --
> Ken Tyler
>
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
> http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Kress wrote:
>
> Really? Even with the onboard shading, lighting, and rendering functions?
> Or would a card specific version of POV be required to take care of those
> functions?
>
> --
> Jim
With the current way that Pov works it calculates each pixel internal to the
program before it outputs to the screen. There are no internal routines that
take advantage of external hardware accelerations. If you read the literature
carefully they make reference to direct x and openGL instruction sets which
are specificaly written to take advantage of such abilities. Pov works in a
completely different way. There's has been a lot of talk about writting an
openGL preview mode for Pov but it is problematic and would still not help
for final renders. Quality of the images produced but direct X and openGL
are inferior to Pov's raytracing methods anyway and I personaly think it
would be a step backward.
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
What Ken states is true. However, there are accelerator boards for professional
graphics that will accelerate POV-Ray. Daystar sells them for the Mac.
Basically, they work by replacing your motherboard with a quad-CPU motherboard.
They are expensive and top out at 1,800 mhz.
If you really want speed, Silicon Graphics has a motherboard that can support
256 alpha RISC CPU's which are now running at 1,000 mhz for a total speed of
256,000 mhz. Better have some really deep pockets for this.
A low budget solution is to get a dual Pentium Dell server and run it as a
workstation.
steve
Ken wrote:
> Jim Kress wrote:
> >
> > Really? Even with the onboard shading, lighting, and rendering functions?
> > Or would a card specific version of POV be required to take care of those
> > functions?
> >
> > --
> > Jim
>
> With the current way that Pov works it calculates each pixel internal to the
> program before it outputs to the screen. There are no internal routines that
> take advantage of external hardware accelerations. If you read the literature
> carefully they make reference to direct x and openGL instruction sets which
> are specificaly written to take advantage of such abilities. Pov works in a
> completely different way. There's has been a lot of talk about writting an
> openGL preview mode for Pov but it is problematic and would still not help
> for final renders. Quality of the images produced but direct X and openGL
> are inferior to Pov's raytracing methods anyway and I personaly think it
> would be a step backward.
>
> --
> Ken Tyler
>
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
> http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Steve <ste### [at] puzzlecraftcom> wrote in message
news:379AF3E8.AF37E7C3@puzzlecraft.com...
>
>
> A low budget solution is to get a dual Pentium Dell server and run it as a
> workstation.
>
Can you elaborate on this a little? I have been having some sort of
thought like this... getting a box and a motherboard and a network card and
using that box to do nothing but renders. No keyboard, monitor, mouse,
soundcard, videocard, with smallest possible HD, lots of RAM...
But, since I have never done any networking but some serial port copying
of HDs...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
What Bill is suggesting is buying a server similar too those found in
offices and running povray on that. What you're thinking of is buying a
bare-bones system to run POV. If you did that you'd still need the
keyboard, mouse and videocard (at the very least to install Windows
etc.) but you could save on the monitor by having a switch box (using
your existing monitor) or running it remotely using a piece of software
such as CarbonCopy. Networking is getting very cheap and what you're
suggesting is entierly possible, all you would need is the two network
cards, a cable and the software (Windows.) I've been doing this
successfully for nearly a year and only had a few minor problems.
Graham.
Bill DeWitt wrote:
>
> Steve <ste### [at] puzzlecraftcom> wrote in message
> news:379AF3E8.AF37E7C3@puzzlecraft.com...
> >
> >
> > A low budget solution is to get a dual Pentium Dell server and run it as a
> > workstation.
> >
>
> Can you elaborate on this a little? I have been having some sort of
> thought like this... getting a box and a motherboard and a network card and
> using that box to do nothing but renders. No keyboard, monitor, mouse,
> soundcard, videocard, with smallest possible HD, lots of RAM...
>
> But, since I have never done any networking but some serial port copying
> of HDs...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> If you really want speed, Silicon Graphics has a motherboard that can
support
> 256 alpha RISC CPU's which are now running at 1,000 mhz for a total speed
of
> 256,000 mhz. Better have some really deep pockets for this.
Sillygon Graphics have an ALPHA cpu running at a 1000Mhz,,
I thought digital (compaq) uses/builds alpha processors and SGI uses MIPS
(R12K being the latest edition, running at 300Mhz), and a SINGLE motherboard
supporting 256 CPU's, I know that their deskside origin2000 sports 1-4 node
cards, 2-8 cpu's. And an Origin2000 rack system can house 1-256 node cards,
2-512 cpu's (R10K or R12K), but that's the entire rack-system, not a single
motherboard.
Could you please give some details on this?
Regards, Jens Berg Churchill.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 24 Jul 1999 20:44:02 -0700, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
>Quality of the images produced but direct X and openGL
>are inferior to Pov's raytracing methods anyway and I personaly think it
>would be a step backward.
True, Ken. These cards are great for their intended use but we would see
no advantage. I don't think that incorporating OpenGL into POV-Ray would be
anything to crow about. We've already fast previews with more control by
using the quality switches (+q). OpenGL might be better suited to displays
from modeling programs, although I like Moray just the way it is now.
--
Alan
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
news.povray.org - where POV-Ray enthusiasts around the world can get
together to exchange ideas, information, and experiences with others
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alan Kong wrote:
>
> On Sat, 24 Jul 1999 20:44:02 -0700, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
>
> >Quality of the images produced but direct X and openGL
> >are inferior to Pov's raytracing methods anyway and I personaly think it
> >would be a step backward.
>
> True, Ken. These cards are great for their intended use but we would see
> no advantage. I don't think that incorporating OpenGL into POV-Ray would be
> anything to crow about. We've already fast previews with more control by
> using the quality switches (+q). OpenGL might be better suited to displays
> from modeling programs, although I like Moray just the way it is now.
>
> --
> Alan
I think I summed it up very well in the VFAQ. If you want to play games and
mpeg movies on your system then by all means buy a good harware accelerated
graphics card. If speed is a concern in raytracing then buy a fast processor,
with a mother board the has a fast buss, good amounts of level one and 2 cache
memory for swapping out instructions, and tons of fast system ram. Then sit
back and wait cause raytracing is a slow process no matter what kind of system
you can afford to buy :)
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Yes networking is easy. As long as it is with winsows. I can't get
linux to see my NIC because it is a 9.99 special. But dual processors
will not speed up POV if I'm correct. Does POV use treads? If it does
it would benefit from mulitple processors.
I heard someone is makeing an eight processor motherboard for the AMD
K7.
Bill DeWitt wrote:
>
> Steve <ste### [at] puzzlecraftcom> wrote in message
> news:379AF3E8.AF37E7C3@puzzlecraft.com...
> >
> >
> > A low budget solution is to get a dual Pentium Dell server and run it as a
> > workstation.
> >
>
> Can you elaborate on this a little? I have been having some sort of
> thought like this... getting a box and a motherboard and a network card and
> using that box to do nothing but renders. No keyboard, monitor, mouse,
> soundcard, videocard, with smallest possible HD, lots of RAM...
>
> But, since I have never done any networking but some serial port copying
> of HDs...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thorsten Froehlich
Subject: Re: New video cards may offload POV
Date: 25 Jul 1999 14:31:05
Message: <379b57e9@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <379B5723.6CD9C078@pilot.msu.edu> , Nick Portelli
<por### [at] pilotmsuedu> wrote:
> Yes networking is easy. As long as it is with winsows. I can't get
> linux to see my NIC because it is a 9.99 special. But dual processors
> will not speed up POV if I'm correct. Does POV use treads? If it does
> it would benefit from mulitple processors.
You can start POV-Ray several times.
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Graham Redway wrote:
> What Bill is suggesting is buying a server similar too those found in
> offices and running povray on that. What you're thinking of is buying a
> bare-bones system to run POV. If you did that you'd still need the
> keyboard, mouse and videocard (at the very least to install Windows
> etc.) but you could save on the monitor by having a switch box (using
> your existing monitor) or running it remotely using a piece of software
> such as CarbonCopy. Networking is getting very cheap and what you're
> suggesting is entierly possible, all you would need is the two network
> cards, a cable and the software (Windows.) I've been doing this
> successfully for nearly a year and only had a few minor problems.
>
> Graham.
>
Well, if you go with Linux you might be able to skip all that. No mouse needed at
all. Keyboard and monitor need only be connect if you are doing a simple
installation (i.e. default off the RedHat CD).
At my prior company, we had a product that was a linux-based small office server.
To configure each box all we had to do was have it hooked to the network and a
serial port. I believe that we'd just connect to the serial port to enter a
machine name and IP address for our install script (running from a boot floppy),
then everything else was automatic. No need for monitor, keyboard or mouse. We
did have a video card, but I'm not sure if that was completely necessary, or just
default on the boxes we were buying.
BTW, I setup a system here at home quickly with a $15 cheapie network card from
Fry's. The main trick was just needing to figure out which driver to use (found
the chip listed then everything else went quickly). I didn't even configure the
graphical display on the system. When I needed to run a graphical configuration
tool, I just telneted in from my main machine, set the display environment
variable to name that main work machine, and then the X display from the new
computer was running on my main computer no problem. Don't even have a monitor
switch box here (but I did use a spare monitor for the initial setup). Gee,
Linux/Unix is quite handy.
--
"My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks
But it was obsolete before I opened the box" - W.A.Y.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nick Portelli wrote in message <379B5723.6CD9C078@pilot.msu.edu>...
>Yes networking is easy. As long as it is with winsows. I can't get
>linux to see my NIC because it is a 9.99 special. But dual processors
>will not speed up POV if I'm correct. Does POV use treads? If it does
>it would benefit from mulitple processors.
>
>I heard someone is makeing an eight processor motherboard for the AMD
>K7.
You could use PVMPov. I think it can handle multiple processors on one
machine.
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote in message <379B48A0.5961D6C2@pacbell.net>...
>I think I summed it up very well in the VFAQ. If you want to play games and
>mpeg movies on your system then by all means buy a good harware accelerated
>graphics card. If speed is a concern in raytracing then buy a fast
processor,
>with a mother board the has a fast buss, good amounts of level one and 2
cache
>memory for swapping out instructions, and tons of fast system ram. Then sit
>back and wait cause raytracing is a slow process no matter what kind of
system
>you can afford to buy :)
Actually, there is one system that can raytrace in real time, using
massively parallel processing -- the real world. Anyone know where I can
buy one? :-)
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Steve <ste### [at] puzzlecraftcom> wrote:
: If you really want speed, Silicon Graphics has a motherboard that can support
: 256 alpha RISC CPU's
Too bad the official povray can't be run in multiple processors...
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
As others have stated, povray will probably never benefit from this card.
Moreover, the official povray will probably _never_ benefit from _any_
card (as long as compilers can't optimize code for them). Povray is intended
to be portable. This means that it has to be compilable in any standard
compiler.
The only way povray could benefit from an acceleration card would be:
a) if the compiler can automatically create optimized code for that specific
card, or b) if you create your own custom compile with inline assembler
optimizations (which is not portable anymore).
AFAIK, no such graphics cards exist nowadays. The 3D graphics cards used
nowadays are pretty useless to povray even if you wanted to optimize it for
them.
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Wagner wrote:
>
> Ken wrote in message <379B48A0.5961D6C2@pacbell.net>...
> >I think I summed it up very well in the VFAQ. If you want to play games and
> >mpeg movies on your system then by all means buy a good harware accelerated
> >graphics card. If speed is a concern in raytracing then buy a fast
> processor,
> >with a mother board the has a fast buss, good amounts of level one and 2
> cache
> >memory for swapping out instructions, and tons of fast system ram. Then sit
> >back and wait cause raytracing is a slow process no matter what kind of
> system
> >you can afford to buy :)
>
> Actually, there is one system that can raytrace in real time, using
> massively parallel processing -- the real world. Anyone know where I can
> buy one? :-)
>
> Mark
The system or a "real" world ?
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 25 Jul 1999 06:24:25 -0500, Steve <ste### [at] puzzlecraftcom>
wrote:
[snip]
>A low budget solution is to get a dual Pentium Dell server and run it as a
>workstation.
>
I know NT can split it's workload, to some degree, between CPU's - but
IIRC POV-Ray itself doesn't support multiple CPU's so is there an
appreciable benefit from a dual-processor PC? Or is there another OS
(Linux?) which can make better use of the 2nd CPU with it's flavour of
POV?
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
You can always run multiple copies of POV, and even with one copy, it
gets most of one processor with less system overhead. Maybe POV-Ray will
be threaded in POV 4.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nick Portelli wrote:
>
> Yes networking is easy. As long as it is with winsows. I can't get
> linux to see my NIC because it is a 9.99 special. But dual processors
> will not speed up POV if I'm correct. Does POV use treads? If it does
> it would benefit from mulitple processors.
>
PVMpov does work well in this sort of situations. Windows + networking.
Nothing I really enjoy, I greatly prefer doing that with linux. *humms*
too bad about the NIC though. tried the newer kernels?
//Spider
--Wail of Sumer.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nick Portelli wrote:
> Yes networking is easy. As long as it is with winsows. I can't get
> linux to see my NIC because it is a 9.99 special.
Have you checked what chips are needed and have you looked on
http://www.deja.com/ to scan newsgroups? I thought I was going to have problems
with my cheapie card, but then I recognized the chip and installed it. Zooom! I
was off and running.
--
"My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks
But it was obsolete before I opened the box" - W.A.Y.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Do you know if PVMpov exists now in version 3.1?
Spider a écrit:
> PVMpov does work well in this sort of situations. Windows + networking.
> Nothing I really enjoy, I greatly prefer doing that with linux. *humms*
> too bad about the NIC though. tried the newer kernels?
>
> //Spider
> --Wail of Sumer.
--
David Etter Perere
Pour me répondre, enlevez le "bof." svp
Please remove ".bof" to answer
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
DEPerere wrote:
>
> Do you know if PVMpov exists now in version 3.1?
In v3.1e at:
http://www.luga.de/~flierl/pvmpov/
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thank's Ken.
I might (is my english coorect?) say you are answering very, but very
fast.
Ken a écrit:
> In v3.1e at:
>
> http://www.luga.de/~flierl/pvmpov/
>
> --
> Ken Tyler
>
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
> http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm
--
David Etter Perere
Pour me répondre, enlevez le "bof." svp
Please remove ".bof" to answer
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote in message <379C26B1.24384A6A@pacbell.net>...
>
>
>Mark Wagner wrote:
>>
>> Ken wrote in message <379B48A0.5961D6C2@pacbell.net>...
>> >I think I summed it up very well in the VFAQ. If you want to play games
and
>> >mpeg movies on your system then by all means buy a good harware
accelerated
>> >graphics card. If speed is a concern in raytracing then buy a fast
>> processor,
>> >with a mother board the has a fast buss, good amounts of level one and 2
>> cache
>> >memory for swapping out instructions, and tons of fast system ram. Then
sit
>> >back and wait cause raytracing is a slow process no matter what kind of
>> system
>> >you can afford to buy :)
>>
>> Actually, there is one system that can raytrace in real time, using
>> massively parallel processing -- the real world. Anyone know where I can
>> buy one? :-)
>>
>> Mark
>
>The system or a "real" world ?
Yes.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Kress wrote in message <379a00af@news.povray.org>...
>Plain PaperTry this link
>http://headline.gamespot.com/news/99_07/23_pc_nvidia/index.html
>
>Looks like the next generation of video boards may start doing some of the
>math currently done in POV.
We seem to get this rumor every few months.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999 10:32:45 +0200, DEPerere <per### [at] bofinfomaniakch>
wrote:
>Thank's Ken.
>I might (is my english coorect?) say you are answering very, but very
>fast.
Scary, isn't it? :)
--
Alan
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
news.povray.org - where POV-Ray enthusiasts around the world can get
together to exchange ideas, information, and experiences with others
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Uncle Ken ain't a person he be a AI.
DEPerere wrote:
>
> Thank's Ken.
> I might (is my english coorect?) say you are answering very, but very
> fast.
>
> Ken a crit:
>
> > In v3.1e at:
> >
> > http://www.luga.de/~flierl/pvmpov/
> >
> > --
> > Ken Tyler
> >
> > mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
> > http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm
>
> --
> David Etter Perere
> Pour me rpondre, enlevez le "bof." svp
> Please remove ".bof" to answer
--
Cheers
Steve
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error reading file mailto:sjl### [at] ndirectcouk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
DEPerere wrote:
>
> Thank's Ken.
> I might (is my english coorect?) say you are answering very, but very
> fast.
>
He is well known for that.. look for replies that come up to an hour
before the questions... :)
//Spider
--Listening to the whispers of the dead.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 28 Jul 1999 08:26:56 GMT, Alan Kong <ako### [at] pacbellNO-SPAMnet>
wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Jul 1999 10:32:45 +0200, DEPerere <per### [at] bofinfomaniakch>
>wrote:
>
>>Thank's Ken.
>>I might (is my english coorect?) say you are answering very, but very
>>fast.
>
> Scary, isn't it? :)
>
>--
I'm starting to think that the POv guys have been messing about with
some AI code...
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Raytracing doesn't really take that long, that is a myth. POV-Ray uses
our processors(which are actually linked together, although you can't
usually tell) for processing portions of Ken's mind. The more we render,
the more processing power available for him.
;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Huff wrote:
>
> Raytracing doesn't really take that long, that is a myth. POV-Ray uses
> our processors(which are actually linked together, although you can't
> usually tell) for processing portions of Ken's mind. The more we render,
> the more processing power available for him.
> ;-)
...more power Scotty ! She given ya all she got capt'n...
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Huff wrote:
> Raytracing doesn't really take that long, that is a myth. POV-Ray uses
> our processors(which are actually linked together, although you can't
> usually tell) for processing portions of Ken's mind. The more we render,
> the more processing power available for him.
> ;-)
humm..., that would mean that behind the pov-ray code there is a big
eastern egg.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 29 Jul 1999 16:45:20 -0500, Chris Huff
<Chr### [at] compuservecom> wrote:
>Raytracing doesn't really take that long, that is a myth. POV-Ray uses
>our processors(which are actually linked together, although you can't
>usually tell) for processing portions of Ken's mind. The more we render,
>the more processing power available for him.
>;-)
>
That explains a LOT - including why of late his links page seems to be
so useful for stuff I'm looking for (e.g. OBJ2POV).
Now all I have to work out is whether what I'm doing while 4 PC's here
are rendering tilts what KenAI does, or whether KenAI also puts out
subliminal messages so that I just "happen" to want what he's already
found...
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 Bowman wrote:
>
> On Thu, 29 Jul 1999 16:45:20 -0500, Chris Huff
> <Chr### [at] compuservecom> wrote:
>
> >Raytracing doesn't really take that long, that is a myth. POV-Ray uses
> >our processors(which are actually linked together, although you can't
> >usually tell) for processing portions of Ken's mind. The more we render,
> >the more processing power available for him.
> >;-)
> >
>
> That explains a LOT - including why of late his links page seems to be
> so useful for stuff I'm looking for (e.g. OBJ2POV).
>
> Now all I have to work out is whether what I'm doing while 4 PC's here
> are rendering tilts what KenAI does, or whether KenAI also puts out
> subliminal messages so that I just "happen" to want what he's already
> found...
>
> 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
One correction sir- where you state KenAI that should read KenI as there is
nothing artificial about my intelligence what there is of it.
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/links.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 31 Jul 1999 08:13:10 -0700, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
>
>
>Cliff Bowman wrote:
[snip]
>> Now all I have to work out is whether what I'm doing while 4 PC's here
>> are rendering tilts what KenAI does, or whether KenAI also puts out
>> subliminal messages so that I just "happen" to want what he's already
>> found...
>>
[snip]
>
>One correction sir- where you state KenAI that should read KenI as there is
>nothing artificial about my intelligence what there is of it.
>
>--
I did consider that - but thought the danger of you being referred to
by the obvious deminutive ("Kenny") too high and insufficiently
respectful...
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
