 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hiya folks,
Just for a laugh, has anyone thought of adding the option of which way
to render the image?
For example, bottom to top or right to left, instead of the regular top
to bottom starting at the left.
Once or twice i've thought it may be nice...
bep
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ben Paschke wrote:
> Hiya folks,
>
> Just for a laugh, has anyone thought of adding the option of which way
> to render the image?
> For example, bottom to top or right to left, instead of the regular top
> to bottom starting at the left.
> Once or twice i've thought it may be nice...
YKYBRTTL...
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricy net> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> YKYBRTTL...
IHBRTTL...
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I was about to say the same....
PSP or Photoshop are here for that.
Fabien
Ken a écrit :
> David Fontaine wrote:
>
> > YKYBRTTL...
>
> IHBRTTL...
>
> --
> Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
> http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
>
> YKYBRTTL...
what - when i need to see the last few lines of an image first? :)
yes, yes, render-subregion yada yada yada.
i said -first-, not -only-!
Lots of renderers dont start at the top left, some even start in the middle
and spiral outwards.
I tell you, it wouldn't be an altogether useless feature.
And yes, i have been raytracing too long. far too long. there's no hope...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ben Paschke wrote in message <3A0A1728.6DED2CB0@rsp.com.au>...
>Hiya folks,
>
>Just for a laugh, has anyone thought of adding the option of which way
>to render the image?
>For example, bottom to top or right to left, instead of the regular top
>to bottom starting at the left.
>Once or twice i've thought it may be nice...
I'm working on random-order rendering.
--
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Allright! Woohoo!
> I'm working on random-order rendering.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ben Paschke wrote:
>
> Hiya folks,
>
> Just for a laugh, has anyone thought of adding the option of which way
> to render the image?
> For example, bottom to top or right to left, instead of the regular top
> to bottom starting at the left.
> Once or twice i've thought it may be nice...
>
Well, it's not for laugh, changing rendering order might speed up
rendering: if rendering is performed by buckets, lets say 32x32 pixels,
then renderer can take advantage of spatial coherence and use various
caching mechanisms more effectively. With current option (from left to
right) rays are hit all over the scene and almost all objects are being
hit during scanning one line, thus making cacheing less effective.
Perhaps this is not the issue with current implementation, but if
someone wants to implement true displacement mapping and use selective
surface division (only this bucket, which is hit, is displaced) to avoid
problems with memory, then this could give considerable speedup.
And with really large scenes, which require more memory, than available
(thus requiring use of swap space) it could be faster as well.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3A0A33FF.802E6A2B@club-internet.fr>, Fabien HENON
<ffj### [at] club-internetfr> wrote:
> I was about to say the same....
>
> PSP or Photoshop are here for that.
What do PSP and Photoshop have to do with rendering order? Or raytracing?
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ben Paschke wrote:
>
> Hiya folks,
>
> Just for a laugh, has anyone thought of adding the option of which way
> to render the image?
> For example, bottom to top or right to left, instead of the regular
> top to bottom starting at the left.
> Once or twice i've thought it may be nice...
camera {
sky -y
location MyCamLoc
look_at MyCamView
}
Now stand on your head while rendering...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3A0A1728.6DED2CB0@rsp.com.au> , Ben Paschke <ben### [at] rspcomau>
wrote:
> Hiya folks,
>
> Just for a laugh, has anyone thought of adding the option of which way
> to render the image?
> For example, bottom to top or right to left, instead of the regular top
> to bottom starting at the left.
> Once or twice i've thought it may be nice...
Changing the render direction will have noticable side effect if you are
using procedural textures like POV-Ray does. I have posted two images of
the spotted.pov example scene that comes with POV-Ray. One is rendered from
the top to the bottom, the other from the bottom to the top.
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi Thorsten!
> Changing the render direction will have noticable side effect if you are
> using procedural textures like POV-Ray does.
Just courios: May I ask: How comes?
cukk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
That is very strange. Was this bottom left to upper right or bottom right to
upper left? I still don't undserstand why the order the rays are traced matter
so much. Any enlightenment?
Josh
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> In article <3A0A1728.6DED2CB0@rsp.com.au> , Ben Paschke <ben### [at] rspcomau>
> wrote:
>
> > Hiya folks,
> >
> > Just for a laugh, has anyone thought of adding the option of which way
> > to render the image?
> > For example, bottom to top or right to left, instead of the regular top
> > to bottom starting at the left.
> > Once or twice i've thought it may be nice...
>
> Changing the render direction will have noticable side effect if you are
> using procedural textures like POV-Ray does. I have posted two images of
> the spotted.pov example scene that comes with POV-Ray. One is rendered from
> the top to the bottom, the other from the bottom to the top.
>
> Thorsten
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
> e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
>
> Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
--
Josh English -- Lexiphanic Lethomaniac
eng### [at] spiritonecom
The POV-Ray Cyclopedia http://www.spiritone.com/~english/cyclopedia/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3A0AF5A6.8D03B49D@spiritone.com> , Josh English
<eng### [at] spiritonecom> wrote:
> That is very strange. Was this bottom left to upper right or bottom right to
> upper left? I still don't undserstand why the order the rays are traced matter
> so much. Any enlightenment?
Very simple: Procedural texture are based on pseudo-random number
generators. While you get the same sequence for every render, you do not
get a reverse sequence when you render from bottom to top.
You would have the same problem with any other render algorithm that splits
up the image as well. This is also one of the complicated issue when it
comes to making POV-Ray multithreaded or do network rendering of single
frames.
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3A0AF5A6.8D03B49D@spiritone.com> , Josh English
<eng### [at] spiritonecom> wrote:
> That is very strange. Was this bottom left to upper right or bottom right to
> upper left?
left to right for both.
____________________________________________________
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3a0b1a3f@news.povray.org>, "Thorsten Froehlich"
<tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> Very simple: Procedural texture are based on pseudo-random number
> generators. While you get the same sequence for every render, you do not
> get a reverse sequence when you render from bottom to top.
I always thought this only affected FRAND(), and that patterns based on
Noise() would always give the same result for every point...hmm...
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
>
> Very simple: Procedural texture are based on pseudo-random number
> generators. While you get the same sequence for every render, you do not
> get a reverse sequence when you render from bottom to top.
>
So how come you get the same pattern at different resolutions and with/without
AA, or when rendering only a subset of the image?
E.g. if I were to render a 480-line image by doing
(+SR480 +ER480), (+SR479 +ER479), ...
would I get a result different from a top-down render?
--
Margus Ramst
Personal e-mail: mar### [at] peakeduee
TAG (Team Assistance Group) e-mail: mar### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3A0B34F2.1E7DF5E5@peak.edu.ee> , Margus Ramst
<mar### [at] peakeduee> wrote:
> So how come you get the same pattern at different resolutions and with/without
> AA, or when rendering only a subset of the image?
You are right, my explanation is wrong. I should look into the code
first...
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Wagner <mar### [at] gtenet> wrote:
: I'm working on random-order rendering.
Does it work with antialiasing?
Does it work with interrupted renders?
If radiosity is used, will the resulting image be identical from render
to render (if nothing is changed)?
What about other features which use caches to use previously calculated
results (I think the crackle pattern uses something like this)?
How much will it take memory?
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote in message <3a0be9f7@news.povray.org>...
>Mark Wagner <mar### [at] gtenet> wrote:
>: I'm working on random-order rendering.
>
> Does it work with antialiasing?
It will do antialiasing as a second rendering pass.
> Does it work with interrupted renders?
Yes.
> If radiosity is used, will the resulting image be identical from render
>to render (if nothing is changed)?
I don't know. I haven't gotten it to a workable form.
> What about other features which use caches to use previously calculated
>results (I think the crackle pattern uses something like this)?
It won't affect the results from the crackle cache, but in many cases will
slow down the rendering.
> How much will it take memory?
Hopefully, not much more than current rendering methods.
--
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Wagner <mar### [at] gtenet> wrote:
:> Does it work with interrupted renders?
: Yes.
How?
:> How much will it take memory?
: Hopefully, not much more than current rendering methods.
How can this be possible if you have to keep the whole image in memory
(for example for the antialiasing pass)?
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 15 Nov 2000 05:19:40 -0500, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>:> How much will it take memory?
>
>: Hopefully, not much more than current rendering methods.
>
> How can this be possible if you have to keep the whole image in memory
>(for example for the antialiasing pass)?
POV-Ray for Windows already does that when display is turned on.
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] usanet
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote in message <3a12633c@news.povray.org>...
>Mark Wagner <mar### [at] gtenet> wrote:
>:> Does it work with interrupted renders?
>
>: Yes.
>
> How?
It stores the number of the last pixel computed in the comments section of
the image file, and uses the number of each pixel to figure out which pixel
to compute next. This isn't true random order, it will just look random.
>:> How much will it take memory?
>
>: Hopefully, not much more than current rendering methods.
>
> How can this be possible if you have to keep the whole image in memory
>(for example for the antialiasing pass)?
It won't need to. It will store the image on disk, probably as a temporary
uncompressed TGA file.
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
