I know it's not POV, but some of the images being produced with
LightFlow( http://www.lightflowtech.com/ ) are really very impressive. 
Has anybody been doing much with it lately ? Is as flexible as POV ?
-- 
Oliver Wood
University Of Durham

http://www.dur.ac.uk/o.e.wood/

Post a reply to this message

oliWood wrote:

> I know it's not POV, but some of the images being produced with
> LightFlow( http://www.lightflowtech.com/ ) are really very impressive.
> Has anybody been doing much with it lately ? Is as flexible as POV ?

I downloaded Lightflow a month or so ago, based on the quality of the
images on the website, and it was just too much of a pain navigating the
clunky scene description language, and struggling with the command line
interface. I felt the same thing about VirtualLight - POV-like, but not
POV, results, with a very difficult SDL and frustrating command line
implementation. I guess I am just spoiled by the POV (Windows) GUI, but I
really didn't see anything in either program that could not be done in
POV.

Post a reply to this message

Dave Dunn wrote:
>
> > LightFlow( http://www.lightflowtech.com/ ) are really very impressive.
> 
> really didn't see anything in either program that could not be done in
> POV.

Wasn't there an informal contest some time ago: Redo LightfFlow
scene in POV :)
 
_____________
Kari Kivisalo

Post a reply to this message

yeah, check out some slightly older posts in the povray.binaries.images
newsgroup. there were some, as you might say, very impressive reproductions.

> >
> > > LightFlow( http://www.lightflowtech.com/ ) are really very impressive.
> >
> > really didn't see anything in either program that could not be done in
> > POV.
>
> Wasn't there an informal contest some time ago: Redo LightfFlow
> scene in POV :)
>
> _____________
> Kari Kivisalo

Post a reply to this message

It seems that the renderers you mention have been designed to
be rendering engines, called by modeling packages.  They can
_also_ be used by writing the script by hand, but this is not
their main goal, contrary to POV.  Do you often write
PostScript files by hand?

-- 
Adrien Beau   adr### [at] freefr   http://adrien.beau.free.fr/

Post a reply to this message

Adrien Beau wrote:

> It seems that the renderers you mention have been designed to
> be rendering engines, called by modeling packages.  They can
> _also_ be used by writing the script by hand, but this is not
> their main goal, contrary to POV.  Do you often write
> PostScript files by hand?

Hmm, that's interesting. I have not seen links to any modelers on either
of those sites, nor have I seen any (freeware or shareware) modelers
that write to their respective formats. I would be most interested in
knowing which modelers write to these renderers as I have not yet
deleted them.

Post a reply to this message

"Dave Dunn" <poi### [at] aolcom> wrote in message
news:3BD5D191.1576E8C8@aol.com...
>
>
> Adrien Beau wrote:
>
> > It seems that the renderers you mention have been designed to
> > be rendering engines, called by modeling packages.  They can
> > _also_ be used by writing the script by hand, but this is not
> > their main goal, contrary to POV.  Do you often write
> > PostScript files by hand?
>
> Hmm, that's interesting. I have not seen links to any modelers on either
> of those sites, nor have I seen any (freeware or shareware) modelers
> that write to their respective formats. I would be most interested in
> knowing which modelers write to these renderers as I have not yet
> deleted them.

Virtualight can be called from within both Maya and 3D Studio, and there is
a python export script for Blender export.

Andy Cocker

Post a reply to this message

The code was unstable and buggy last time I played with it.
I don't think there has been any updates in over a year.


oliWood wrote:

> I know it's not POV, but some of the images being produced with
> LightFlow( http://www.lightflowtech.com/ ) are really very impressive.
> Has anybody been doing much with it lately ? Is as flexible as POV ?
> --
> Oliver Wood
> University Of Durham
> 
> http://www.dur.ac.uk/o.e.wood/

Post a reply to this message

"Dave Dunn" <poi### [at] aolcom> wrote in message
news:3BD5D191.1576E8C8@aol.com...
>
>
> Adrien Beau wrote:
>
> > It seems that the renderers you mention have been designed to
> > be rendering engines, called by modeling packages.  They can
> > _also_ be used by writing the script by hand, but this is not
> > their main goal, contrary to POV.  Do you often write
> > PostScript files by hand?
>
> Hmm, that's interesting. I have not seen links to any modelers on either
> of those sites, nor have I seen any (freeware or shareware) modelers
> that write to their respective formats. I would be most interested in
> knowing which modelers write to these renderers as I have not yet
> deleted them.

I haven't tried it out but I noticed a LightFlow export option in the latest
version of hamaPatch. It certainly isn't a "complete" modeling solution, but a
supporting modeler nonetheless.

^"^

Post a reply to this message

Dave Dunn wrote:
> 
> Hmm, that's interesting. I have not seen links to any modelers on either
> of those sites, nor have I seen any (freeware or shareware) modelers
> that write to their respective formats.

Well, I have read both sites, and it is explicitely mentionned
in several places (perhaps there are no links, though). In fact,
their whole business plan lies there.

Both packages feature integration (sometimes a work in progress)
to Maya and 3D Studio, and some work in the Blender area.

> I would be most interested in
> knowing which modelers write to these renderers as I have not yet
> deleted them.

I have not checked the details, but I'm not sure the Maya
or 3D Studio plugins are free. That's the whole idea: you
can try the rendering engine for free, you can even use it

want to do professionnal modeller-based work, please pay.




-- 
Adrien Beau   adr### [at] freefr   http://adrien.beau.free.fr/

Post a reply to this message