 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Is there anyone who knows when will POV 3.5 ready?
I'm really looking forward to reading the new documentation (MegaPov's
documentation is sometimes poor...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jonathan Rafael Ghiglia" <j.l### [at] libero it> wrote in message
news:3a39393e.5845869@news.povray.org...
> Is there anyone who knows when will POV 3.5 ready?
> I'm really looking forward to reading the new documentation (MegaPov's
> documentation is sometimes poor...)
They are working on it even as we speak. It will be available as soon as
it is done. The provisionary schedule is tight but they hope to stick to the
latest revision of it, barring unforeseen circumstances and/or any other
obstacle. We have assurances that the progress is optimal and that a
satisfactory result is in the works. If there is an advance notification
that becomes public, it will be posted in the appropriate places and all
interested will be made aware of it.
--
What must underlie petitioners’ entire federal assault
on the Florida election procedures is an unstated lack of
confidence in the impartiality and capacity of the state
judges who would make the critical decisions if the vote
count were to proceed. - Dissent : Supreme Court
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3a39393e.5845869@news.povray.org>, j.l### [at] liberoit
(Jonathan Rafael Ghiglia) wrote:
> Is there anyone who knows when will POV 3.5 ready?
Please read the message "POV-Team Status Report - September 1, 2000" in
povray.announce.frequently-asked-questions. It contains all the current
public information.
Basically, the POV-Team is working on it. Nobody knows when it will be
ready, and there is much work to do, but the final feature list has been
decided, so there will be no major additions beyond what has been listed.
> I'm really looking forward to reading the new documentation (MegaPov's
> documentation is sometimes poor...)
If you can't find the answer in the documentation, just ask in
povray.unofficial.patches. That's what that group is for... :-)
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Why everyone is so desperate?
I personally prefer a well-tested and mature program later than a
half-hearted and buggy program now.
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
> ):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
A little off-topic... but great one-liner, by the way. :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hello,
> A little off-topic... but great one-liner, by the way. :-)
Did you know what it does without compiling it?
Lutz
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> I personally prefer a well-tested and mature program later than a
> half-hearted and buggy program now.
What? They still make those? ;)
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > I personally prefer a well-tested and mature program later than a
> > half-hearted and buggy program now.
>
> What? They still make those? ;)
I do.
--
ZK
http://www.povplace.be.tf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Zeger Knaepen <zeg### [at] studentkuleuvenacbe> wrote:
:> > I personally prefer a well-tested and mature program later than a
:> > half-hearted and buggy program now.
:>
:> What? They still make those? ;)
: I do.
Half-hearted buggy programs?-)
--
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" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3a39ff4d@news.povray.org...
> Why everyone is so desperate?
> I personally prefer a well-tested and mature program later than a
> half-hearted and buggy program now.
Much agreed.
Personally, I don't even use half the features in POV (Plain Old POV), so
POV 3.5, or even MegaPOV probably wouldn't do me much good :-)
Until Moray supports it, that is. Heh heh heh!
-Ian
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ian Burgmyer wrote:
> Personally, I don't even use half the features in POV (Plain Old POV), so
> POV 3.5, or even MegaPOV probably wouldn't do me much good :-)
But you still use a lot, no? Just because you don't use everything in one
doesn't mean the other can't be useful. Even with a modeller, you could get
some limited use out of MegaPOV from new texture options like conserve_energy
and variable reflection. As for hand-coding there's all the more, like
trace() and isosurface. Even with Plain Old POV, there's features like poly
and macro you can't access with a modeller.
> Until Moray supports it, that is. Heh heh heh!
Modellers are all good and fun, but they'll never be able to do things like
isosurface...
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > Until Moray supports it, that is. Heh heh heh!
>
> Modellers are all good and fun, but they'll never be able to do things
like
> isosurface...
if povray can evaluate an iso surface, i am very sure with some creative
programming a modeller could do the same - and dont forget, in a modelling
environment you not allways after the same level of precision as the final
render.
all we need if a mfc programmer who understand iso functions to write a
moray plugin :)
--
Rick
POV-Ray News & Resources - http://povray.co.uk
Kitty5 WebDesign - http://kitty5.com
Hi-Impact web site design & database driven e-commerce
TEL : +44 (01625) 266358 - FAX : +44 (01625) 611913 - ICQ : 15776037
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
--
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rick [Kitty5] <ric### [at] kitty5com> wrote:
: if povray can evaluate an iso surface, i am very sure with some creative
: programming a modeller could do the same
Raytracing an isosurface and creating a wireframe from an isosurface are
two different things.
Both are perfectly possible, though.
--
char*i="b[7FK@`3NB6>B:b3O6>:B:b3O6><`3:;8:6f733:>::b?7B>:>^B>C73;S1";
main(_,c,m){for(m=32;c=*i++-49;c&m?puts(""):m)for(_=(
c/4)&7;putchar(m),_--?m:(_=(1<<(c&3))-1,(m^=3)&3););} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > Modellers are all good and fun, but they'll never be able to do things
> like
> > isosurface...
Doesn't Rhino3d use iso surfaces? I know it uses mathematical functions to
model surfaces. If not, what s the difference. What's the difference between
nurbs and iso surfaces?
Nekar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Modellers are all good and fun, but they'll never be able to do things
like
> isosurface...
With a small plugin, MAX does, which proves "they'll never be able to do
things like isosurface..." wrong.
--
Lance.
http://come.to/the.zone
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
J-Print News wrote:
>
> Doesn't Rhino3d use iso surfaces? I know it uses mathematical functions to
> model surfaces. If not, what s the difference. What's the difference between
> nurbs and iso surfaces?
>
Rhino uses NURBS (non-uniform rational B-spline) surfaces. NURBS are
parametric surfaces, where surface is described by 2 additional
parametric values u and v. To put it bluntly, for NURBS surface there is
3 equations:
x = fx(u,v)
y = fy(u,v)
z = fz(u,v)
You run u and v values over given range (quite often it is from 0-1) and
calculate points (x,y,z) on surface.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lance Birch wrote:
> With a small plugin, MAX does, which proves "they'll never be able to do
> things like isosurface..." wrong.
noooooooo ;)
isosurface in a (near) real-time GUI modeller? with any function you want?
wow
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3A6633BC.C00F0ACA@faricy.net> , David Fontaine
<dav### [at] faricynet> wrote:
> isosurface in a (near) real-time GUI modeller? with any function you want?
Isosurfaces in MegaPOV are very slow. There are ways to calculate them with
the same/better precision but more than ten times faster...
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
>
> Isosurfaces in MegaPOV are very slow. There are ways to calculate them with
> the same/better precision but more than ten times faster...
>
Do i hear some plans for improvements, or is it just my hope for
accelerating those endless isosurface renders?
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 18 Jan 2001 20:25:54 +0100, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
>
>Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
>>
>> Isosurfaces in MegaPOV are very slow. There are ways to calculate them with
>> the same/better precision but more than ten times faster...
>>
>
>Do i hear some plans for improvements, or is it just my hope for
>accelerating those endless isosurface renders?
Yes, you either hear plans for improvements or it's your hope for
accelerating those endless isosurface renders. Or both.
--
Ron Parker http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
My opinions. Mine. Not anyone else's.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ron Parker wrote:
>
>
> Yes, you either hear plans for improvements or it's your hope for
> accelerating those endless isosurface renders. Or both.
>
Thanks for that unambiguous answer. ;-)
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3a673c74$1@news.povray.org>, "Thorsten Froehlich"
<tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
> Isosurfaces in MegaPOV are very slow. There are ways to calculate
> them with the same/better precision but more than ten times faster...
Are you talking about tesselating them first, and rendering the mesh?
(As is done with modellers...)
Or something else? A specific flaw in the algorithm used in the
isosurface patch?
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <chrishuff-A11C99.21084719012001@news.povray.org> , Chris Huff
<chr### [at] maccom> wrote:
> Are you talking about tesselating them first, and rendering the mesh?
> (As is done with modellers...)
> Or something else? A specific flaw in the algorithm used in the
> isosurface patch?
Lets wait a few weeks with this :-)
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
