|
 |
As shown in my post "Cubic spline question" the cubic spline used in
spline{} is completely different from the cubic spline used in prisms, yet
they go under the same name.
In this post I'll show a case of the opposite - two identical splines go
under completely different names.
The catmull_rom_spline used in sphere_sweeps is in fact exactly identical to
the cubic_spline used in prisms. Why do they have different names? I don't
know. It dates back to MegaPov of course, but POV-Ray 3.5 is not MegaPov.
Well, at least it should be rather easy to fix as it's just a matter of
changing the keyword I would think. The code below illustrates that the two
spline types are in fact the same.
camera {location 10*y look_at 0}
light_source {1000*y, color 1}
plane {y, 0 pigment {checker rgb 1.0, rgb 0.9}}
sphere_sweep {
catmull_rom_spline
8,
<-2,0, 0>, 0.02,
< 0,0,-2>, 0.02,
< 4,0, 0>, 0.03,
< 1,0, 1>, 0.01,
< 0,0, 4>, 0.03,
<-2,0, 0>, 0.02,
< 0,0,-2>, 0.02,
< 4,0, 0>, 0.03
pigment {color <0,0,1>}
}
prism {
cubic_spline
0, 0.01
8,
<-2, 0>,
< 0,-2>,
< 4, 0>,
< 1, 1>,
< 0, 4>,
<-2, 0>,
< 0,-2>,
< 4, 0>
pigment {color <0,1,0>}
}
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated Jan 20)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
On Sat, 16 Feb 2002 12:53:06 +0100, Rune wrote:
> The catmull_rom_spline used in sphere_sweeps is in fact exactly identical to
> the cubic_spline used in prisms. Why do they have different names? I don't
> know. It dates back to MegaPov of course, but POV-Ray 3.5 is not MegaPov.
And povray.general is not povray.beta-test.
--
#local R=<7084844682857967,0787982,826975826580>;#macro L(P)concat(#while(P)chr(
mod(P,100)),#local P=P/100;#end"")#end background{rgb 1}text{ttf L(R.x)L(R.y)0,0
translate<-.8,0,-1>}text{ttf L(R.x)L(R.z)0,0translate<-1.6,-.75,-1>}sphere{z/9e3
4/26/2001finish{reflection 1}}//ron.parker@povray.org My opinions, nobody else's
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
"Ron Parker" wrote:
> And povray.general is not povray.beta-test.
Right, and as it was not exactly a bug, and as there might be a reason for
the design, I deliberately didn't post to povray.beta-test. People have been
told often enough to discuss non-bug related 3.5 issues outside of
povray.beta-test, and that especially applies to feature requests, which my
message could be interpreted as.
However, I take it from your reply that a report in povray.beta-test would
be in place, and a such I will happily send.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated Feb 16)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 22:59:25 +0100, Rune wrote:
> "Ron Parker" wrote:
>> And povray.general is not povray.beta-test.
>
> Right, and as it was not exactly a bug, and as there might be a reason for
> the design, I deliberately didn't post to povray.beta-test. People have been
> told often enough to discuss non-bug related 3.5 issues outside of
> povray.beta-test, and that especially applies to feature requests, which my
> message could be interpreted as.
>
> However, I take it from your reply that a report in povray.beta-test would
> be in place, and a such I will happily send.
Well, I think it's at least something that should be documented.
--
#local R=rgb 99;#local P=R-R;#local F=pigment{gradient x}box{0,1pigment{gradient
y pigment_map{[.5F pigment_map{[.3R][.3F color_map{[.15red 99][.15P]}rotate z*45
translate x]}]#local H=pigment{gradient y color_map{[.5P][.5R]}scale 1/3}[.5F
pigment_map{[.3R][.3H][.7H][.7R]}]}}}camera{location.5-3*z}//only my opinions
Post a reply to this message
|
|
