 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
When I try to render this object Povray tells me it is infinite. The
"bounded_by"
seems to have no effect on this object. Why does Povray think this is
infinite?
#declare One =
difference {
height_field {
tga "MyPicture.tga"
smooth
hierarchy on
translate <-0.5, -0.5, -0.5>
rotate <-90,0,0>
scale <0.3,1,0.1>
photons {target reflection on}
}
box{<-0.2,-0.6,-0.02>,<0.2,0.6,2> pigment {rgbft <1,1,1,0,1>}
no_shadow no_reflection no_image photons {collect off}
}
bounded_by { box{<-5,-5,-5>,<5,5,5>}}
}
object{One}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Dugan <pat### [at] usnetcomcorp com> wrote:
> When I try to render this object Povray tells me it is infinite.
So?
> The "bounded_by" seems to have no effect on this object.
Why should it?
bounded_by does not change the shape or dimensions of an object. It's
not CSG.
> Why does Povray think this is infinite?
Because it is?
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'm trying to use it with photons and reduce the time it requires. That is
why. I see no reason why this
would be infinite.
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3caa048e@news.povray.org...
> Patrick Dugan <pat### [at] usnetcomcorpcom> wrote:
> > When I try to render this object Povray tells me it is infinite.
>
> So?
>
> > The "bounded_by" seems to have no effect on this object.
>
> Why should it?
> bounded_by does not change the shape or dimensions of an object. It's
> not CSG.
>
> > Why does Povray think this is infinite?
>
> Because it is?
>
> --
> #macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb
M()}}
> N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
> N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// -
Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ah, I see.
The problem is that the box is inverted. (It's implicitly inverted because
you are using a difference.)
But there's a solution to the problem: Clip the entire CSG with for
example a box.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The inverted box should still not be infinite. Clipping the entire csg
results in no image!
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3caa07cd@news.povray.org...
> Ah, I see.
> The problem is that the box is inverted. (It's implicitly inverted
because
> you are using a difference.)
> But there's a solution to the problem: Clip the entire CSG with for
> example a box.
>
> --
> #macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb
M()}}
> N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
> N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// -
Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Dugan <pat### [at] usnetcomcorpcom> wrote:
> The inverted box should still not be infinite.
An inverted box is infinite.
> Clipping the entire csg
> results in no image!
How did you clip it?
Just add something like clipped_by { box { -1,1 } } at the end of the CSG
or whatever.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" wrote:
> Patrick Dugan <pat### [at] usnetcomcorpcom> wrote:
> > The inverted box should still not be infinite.
>
> An inverted box is infinite.
No, it's not.
At least not from POV-Ray's point of view (just try).
--
Jonathan.
Home: http://digilander.iol.it/jrgpov
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 2 Apr 2002 23:50:35 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > An inverted box is infinite.
>
> No, it's not.
it is
> At least not from POV-Ray's point of view (just try).
ok, try inverse box - it is hole in everything
// begin scene
box{-1 1 translate z*10 inverse}
// end scene
Warning: Camera is _inside_ a non-hollow object.
And put camera anywhere to test where box will finish.
But You can be mistaken by:
// begin scene
#include "strings"
#local B=box{-1 1 translate z*10 inverse}
#warning VStr(min_extent(B))
#warning VStr(max_extent(B))
// end scene
but min/max_extent returns coordinates of _bounding box_ which isn't object but
speed trick - as documentation says: "the bounding box does not represent the
actual dimensions of the object".
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
That does not make it an infinite object.
I can read:
"scene contains 1 frame level objects; 0 infinite".
Either an inverted object isn't infinite, or that message is wrong.
BTW, I used difference many times, and my CSG objects never happened to become
infinte.
--
Jonathan.
Home: http://digilander.iol.it/jrgpov
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <f1akau43uc8teqpiq8pcch83k4s23rjkui@4ax.com>,
W?odzimierz ABX Skiba <abx### [at] babilonorg> wrote:
> ok, try inverse box - it is hole in everything
>
> // begin scene
> box{-1 1 translate z*10 inverse}
> // end scene
>
> Warning: Camera is _inside_ a non-hollow object.
> And put camera anywhere to test where box will finish.
You are mistaken. This message means exactly what it says, the camera is
inside the box. It has nothing to do with finite-vs-infinite, any solid
shape can produce it. If you put it at < 0, 0, 0>, you won't get this
message.
> but min/max_extent returns coordinates of _bounding box_ which isn't
> object but speed trick - as documentation says: "the bounding box
> does not represent the actual dimensions of the object".
But infinite objects don't have finite bounding boxes. And anyway, the
bounding box of an axis-aligned box is pretty accurate.
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"W³odzimierz ABX Skiba" wrote:
> Warning: Camera is _inside_ a non-hollow object.
> And put camera anywhere to test where box will finish.
Ah. You are mistaken here. If you don't use 'interior', POV-Ray objects don't have
true interior at all. Inverse just tells POV-Ray to consider 'inside' what before was
'outside'. That's it. It's an infinite surface which makes an infinite object.
--
Jonathan.
Home: http://digilander.iol.it/jrgpov
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:07:32 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> That does not make it an infinite object.
> I can read:
> "scene contains 1 frame level objects; 0 infinite".
IIRC this counting message consider bounding boxes so nothing strange (but of
course can confuse).
> Either an inverted object isn't infinite, or that message is wrong.
Another test: make box, add inverse, hollow and media and tell me where media
appear ?
> BTW, I used difference many times, and my CSG objects never happened to become
> infinte.
You were lucky. Creation of bounding boxes for CSG isn't so simple to have one
general rule. IIRC it depends on relation in space, volume, type of csg etc.
Documentation says about bounding: "For difference and intersection operations
this will hardly ever lead to an optimal bounding box. It's sometimes better
(depending on the complexity of the CSG object) to have you place a bounding
shape yourself using a bounded_by statement."
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 02 Apr 2002 17:18:56 -0600, Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
wrote:
> You are mistaken. This message means exactly what it says, the camera is
> inside the box. It has nothing to do with finite-vs-infinite
#local B=box{-1 0 inverse};
#local Test = 1+0*x;
#while(inside(B,Test))
#local Test=Test+1;
#end
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"W³odzimierz ABX Skiba" wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:07:32 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > That does not make it an infinite object.
> > I can read:
> > "scene contains 1 frame level objects; 0 infinite".
>
> IIRC this counting message consider bounding boxes so nothing strange (but of
> course can confuse).
You know that anything out of the bounding box is just clipped, don't you? So a
finite bounding_box _means_ a finite object.
>
> > Either an inverted object isn't infinite, or that message is wrong.
>
> Another test: make box, add inverse, hollow and media and tell me where media
> appear ?
Nowhere. I tried and it looked plain wrong.
> > BTW, I used difference many times, and my CSG objects never happened to become
> > infinte.
>
> You were lucky. Creation of bounding boxes for CSG isn't so simple to have one
> general rule. IIRC it depends on relation in space, volume, type of csg etc.
> Documentation says about bounding: "For difference and intersection operations
> this will hardly ever lead to an optimal bounding box. It's sometimes better
> (depending on the complexity of the CSG object) to have you place a bounding
> shape yourself using a bounded_by statement."
As a matter of fact I use bounded_by quite often. IIRC my coffee-percolator model
(mostly made of intersected planes) was about 300% faster with my manual bounding.
--
Jonathan.
Home: http://digilander.iol.it/jrgpov
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:17:27 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> It's an infinite surface which makes an infinite object.
In my definition it's an infinite volume which makes an infinite object.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"W³odzimierz ABX Skiba" wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Apr 2002 17:18:56 -0600, Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
> wrote:
> > You are mistaken. This message means exactly what it says, the camera is
> > inside the box. It has nothing to do with finite-vs-infinite
>
> #local B=box{-1 0 inverse};
> #local Test = 1+0*x;
> #while(inside(B,Test))
> #local Test=Test+1;
> #end
This means nothing.
#local B=box{-1 0};
#local Test = 1+0*x;
#while(!inside(B,Test))
#local Test=Test+1;
#end
It's just the same thing. What before was considered 'inside' is now considered
'outside'. This has nothing to do with the finiteness (sp?) of the box.
> In my definition it's an infinite volume which makes an infinite object.
But we're talking about POV-Ray's definition, aren't we?
--
Jonathan.
Home: http://digilander.iol.it/jrgpov
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:27:03 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> You know that anything out of the bounding box is just clipped, don't you?
Not at all. It separates rays to perform intersection test. But when
intersection point is outside bounding box but ray goes through bounding box
then it is visible.
Also iirc there is a switch in ini settings.
> So a finite bounding_box _means_ a finite object.
I never saw basic trick with bounding box near camera probably.
> > > Either an inverted object isn't infinite, or that message is wrong.
> >
> > Another test: make box, add inverse, hollow and media and tell me where media
> > appear ?
>
> Nowhere. I tried and it looked plain wrong.
I've not tested proposed example. I was really interested what result it could
produce. Perhaps it could be considered a bug. I don't know.
ABX
--
disc{z,-z#macro O()asc(substr("-+((1*(,1,/.-,*/(,&.323/'1"e,1))*.1-4#declare
e=e-1;#end#local e=26;5pigment{#local g=function(_){ceil(_)-_}function#local
k=function{pattern{object{sphere_sweep{linear_spline 13#while(e)<O(),O()//35
>.01#end}}}}{k(g(atan2(x,y)),g(ln((y+x)^2+1e-5)),0)}}finish{ambient 1}}//ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
JRG <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> An inverted box is infinite.
> No, it's not.
> At least not from POV-Ray's point of view (just try).
In the given example, if I replace "difference" with intersection, the
object becomes finite (POV-Ray reports 1 object, 0 infinite). If I then
make the box inverted, it becomes infinite (POV-Ray reports 1 object,
1 infinite).
By logic, making the box inverted makes it infinite. Difference inverts
internally the second and subsequent objects, which explain what is
happening.
Clipping the whole object (with a proper clipped_by object) makes it
finite (POV-Ray reports 1 object, 0 infinite). This is logical because
now the object has been limited to the clipped_by object, which is finite.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"W³odzimierz ABX Skiba" wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:27:03 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > You know that anything out of the bounding box is just clipped, don't you?
>
> Not at all. It separates rays to perform intersection test. But when
> intersection point is outside bounding box but ray goes through bounding box
> then it is visible.
Anyway, you get unpredictable results. You cannot consider what is outside the
bounding box part of the object.
The docs say: "Note that if bounding shape is too small or positioned incorrectly it
may clip the object in undefined ways or the object may not appear at all."
> Also iirc there is a switch in ini settings.
>
> > So a finite bounding_box _means_ a finite object.
>
> I never saw basic trick with bounding box near camera probably.
I'm not sure what you want to say. Which trick?
--
Jonathan.
Home: http://digilander.iol.it/jrgpov
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Try any other difference which does not contain a heightfield: do you get an infinite
object? (That could be a problem concerning h-f). And have you really tried the most
simple example: box {-1,1 inverse}?
Like ABX you are thinking in terms of volumes. POV-Ray dislikes that concept.
--
Jonathan.
Home: http://digilander.iol.it/jrgpov
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:31:53 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > In my definition it's an infinite volume which makes an infinite object.
>
> But we're talking about POV-Ray's definition, aren't we?
I have digged documentation to find definition of finite/infinite and passed so
therefore reffered to my definition. My definition and my tests tell me that
inversed box has finite surface and infinite volume and therefore differenced
with another object can make infinite result.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
JRG <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Try any other difference which does not contain a heightfield: do you get an
infinite
> object? (That could be a problem concerning h-f).
This may need a bit of researching.
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
W³odzimierz ABX Skiba <abx### [at] babilonorg> wrote:
> I have digged documentation to find definition of finite/infinite and passed so
> therefore reffered to my definition. My definition and my tests tell me that
> inversed box has finite surface and infinite volume and therefore differenced
> with another object can make infinite result.
However, the difference of two boxes is not infinite.
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:52:43 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Like ABX you are thinking in terms of volumes. POV-Ray dislikes that concept.
Try to make sphere as poly (ready script in documentation of 3.5 ) and tell me
is it finite or infinite ? It has finite surface.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:47:29 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > > So a finite bounding_box _means_ a finite object.
> >
> > I never saw basic trick with bounding box near camera probably.
>
> I'm not sure what you want to say.
Somehow I placed I instead of You. It's becouse of 24 hours at work.
> Which trick?
Currently I can't find most typical animation of this type of trick/technic.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
That's different. POV-Ray doesn't have a clue about how big the poly object may
result (but I can be wrong here. Never used it before.)
I think with poly objects manual bounding is a good habit (note that a bounding box
makes it a finite object: i.e. it cannot exist an infinite object with a finite
bounding box).
--
Jonathan.
Home: http://digilander.iol.it/jrgpov
"W³odzimierz ABX Skiba" <abx### [at] babilonorg> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:nsekau8uqei7hucgtorjd3f8pv1n8chn4e@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:52:43 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > Like ABX you are thinking in terms of volumes. POV-Ray dislikes that concept.
>
> Try to make sphere as poly (ready script in documentation of 3.5 ) and tell me
> is it finite or infinite ? It has finite surface.
>
> ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"JRG" wrote:
> That's different. POV-Ray doesn't have a clue about how big the poly object may
> result (but I can be wrong here. Never used it before.)
> I think with poly objects manual bounding is a good habit (note that a bounding box
> makes it a finite object: i.e. it cannot exist an infinite object with a finite
> bounding box).
Here's my new definition: a finite object is an object with a finite bounding box.
Everything else is infinite. He he.
--
Jonathan.
Home: http://digilander.iol.it/jrgpov
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:28:49 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> That's different. POV-Ray doesn't have a clue about how big the poly object may
> result (but I can be wrong here. Never used it before.)
Example was reffered to your definition of infinity: "It's an infinite surface
which makes an infinite object."
> it cannot exist an infinite object with a finite
> bounding box.
According to my definition of infinity (volume) it is true but according to your
definition (surface) it isn't. According to output of "Scene contains..." it is
probably ture but....
... is any not inversed not transformed box finite ? Then
plane{y 0 bounded_by{box{-(1e50) 1e50 }}}
:-)
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:37:38 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Here's my new definition: a finite object is an object with a finite bounding box.
"But we're talking about POV-Ray's definition, aren't we?" ;-)
> Everything else is infinite. He he.
as I already said:
plane{y 0 bounded_by{box{-(1e50) 1e50 }}}
:-)
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"W³odzimierz ABX Skiba" wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:28:49 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > That's different. POV-Ray doesn't have a clue about how big the poly object may
> > result (but I can be wrong here. Never used it before.)
>
> Example was reffered to your definition of infinity: "It's an infinite surface
> which makes an infinite object."
Good point. See my new definition. :)
> > it cannot exist an infinite object with a finite
> > bounding box.
>
> According to my definition of infinity (volume) it is true but according to your
> definition (surface) it isn't. According to output of "Scene contains..." it is
> probably ture but....
>
> ... is any not inversed not transformed box finite ? Then
>
> plane{y 0 bounded_by{box{-(1e50) 1e50 }}}
Aw, come on. You know better than me that a box that big is considered infinite by
POV...
--
Jonathan.
Home: http://digilander.iol.it/jrgpov
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:49:23 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Aw, come on. You know better than me that a box that big is considered infinite by
> POV...
So your definition is POV definition and POV definition is sentence witch starts
with "Scene contains ..." , right ?
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3caa034f@news.povray.org>,
"Patrick Dugan" <pat### [at] usnetcomcorpcom> wrote:
> #declare One =
> difference {
> height_field {
> tga "MyPicture.tga"
> smooth
> hierarchy on
> translate <-0.5, -0.5, -0.5>
> rotate <-90,0,0>
> scale <0.3,1,0.1>
> photons {target reflection on}
> }
> box{<-0.2,-0.6,-0.02>,<0.2,0.6,2> pigment {rgbft <1,1,1,0,1>}
> no_shadow no_reflection no_image photons {collect off}
> }
> bounded_by { box{<-5,-5,-5>,<5,5,5>}}
> }
A point is considered "inside" a height_field if it is "below" it. If
the height_field is not rotated or sheared, all points -y of some part
of the surface are inside it.
POV seems to have a hard time with this fact in this case, it knows the
height field isn't bound to a cubic space and that the difference
surface may occur anywhere, so it considers it to be infinite when
computing the bounding boxes. A better solution might be to use a box
extending very far downward for the CSG bounding computations, or to
limit the height_field object to a cube.
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3caa2e16@news.povray.org>, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom>
wrote:
> Ah. You are mistaken here. If you don't use 'interior', POV-Ray
> objects don't have true interior at all. Inverse just tells POV-Ray
> to consider 'inside' what before was 'outside'. That's it. It's an
> infinite surface which makes an infinite object.
Actually, the interior keyword has nothing to do with whether an object
is considered solid or not. Otherwise, you would have to specify an
interior just to use CSG.
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Would I simply use a bounded_by for the heightfield itself rather than on
the difference between it and the box?
"Christopher James Huff" <chr### [at] maccom> wrote in message
news:chr### [at] netplexaussieorg...
> In article <3caa034f@news.povray.org>,
> "Patrick Dugan" <pat### [at] usnetcomcorpcom> wrote:
>
> > #declare One =
> > difference {
> > height_field {
> > tga "MyPicture.tga"
> > smooth
> > hierarchy on
> > translate <-0.5, -0.5, -0.5>
> > rotate <-90,0,0>
> > scale <0.3,1,0.1>
> > photons {target reflection on}
> > }
> > box{<-0.2,-0.6,-0.02>,<0.2,0.6,2> pigment {rgbft <1,1,1,0,1>}
> > no_shadow no_reflection no_image photons {collect off}
> > }
> > bounded_by { box{<-5,-5,-5>,<5,5,5>}}
> > }
>
> A point is considered "inside" a height_field if it is "below" it. If
> the height_field is not rotated or sheared, all points -y of some part
> of the surface are inside it.
>
> POV seems to have a hard time with this fact in this case, it knows the
> height field isn't bound to a cubic space and that the difference
> surface may occur anywhere, so it considers it to be infinite when
> computing the bounding boxes. A better solution might be to use a box
> extending very far downward for the CSG bounding computations, or to
> limit the height_field object to a cube.
>
> --
> Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
> POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
> TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I finally gave up. I re-created the object using primitives and avoided the
HF altogether. The object is now finite
"Christopher James Huff" <chr### [at] maccom> wrote in message
news:chr### [at] netplexaussieorg...
> In article <3caa034f@news.povray.org>,
> "Patrick Dugan" <pat### [at] usnetcomcorpcom> wrote:
>
> > #declare One =
> > difference {
> > height_field {
> > tga "MyPicture.tga"
> > smooth
> > hierarchy on
> > translate <-0.5, -0.5, -0.5>
> > rotate <-90,0,0>
> > scale <0.3,1,0.1>
> > photons {target reflection on}
> > }
> > box{<-0.2,-0.6,-0.02>,<0.2,0.6,2> pigment {rgbft <1,1,1,0,1>}
> > no_shadow no_reflection no_image photons {collect off}
> > }
> > bounded_by { box{<-5,-5,-5>,<5,5,5>}}
> > }
>
> A point is considered "inside" a height_field if it is "below" it. If
> the height_field is not rotated or sheared, all points -y of some part
> of the surface are inside it.
>
> POV seems to have a hard time with this fact in this case, it knows the
> height field isn't bound to a cubic space and that the difference
> surface may occur anywhere, so it considers it to be infinite when
> computing the bounding boxes. A better solution might be to use a box
> extending very far downward for the CSG bounding computations, or to
> limit the height_field object to a cube.
>
> --
> Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
> POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
> TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Dugan <pat### [at] netinsnet> wrote:
> I finally gave up. I re-created the object using primitives and avoided the
> HF altogether. The object is now finite
Why didn't you clip the object as I suggested? It would have made the
object finite.
Well, do as you wish.
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Because clipping didn't work. Clipping the object as you suggested resulted
in the object disappearing.
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3caaedd0$1@news.povray.org...
> Patrick Dugan <pat### [at] netinsnet> wrote:
> > I finally gave up. I re-created the object using primitives and avoided
the
> > HF altogether. The object is now finite
>
> Why didn't you clip the object as I suggested? It would have made the
> object finite.
> Well, do as you wish.
>
> --
> #macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb
x]
> [1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
> -1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// -
Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
After I thought about what you suggested I realized I misunderstood what you
meant.
I assumed you meant to replace the bounded_by with a clipped_by. Of course
that removes the entire object.
I didn't try using a clipped_by (as opposed to a difference) on the HF. (I
feel pretty stupid right now....)
However recreating the object via primitives didn't take that long. Don't
know if it would be better memory/speedwise
to use the primtives or the HF but at this point it works so I'll probably
leave it alone.
Thank you for your suggestions.
Patrick Dugan
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3caaedd0$1@news.povray.org...
> Patrick Dugan <pat### [at] netinsnet> wrote:
> > I finally gave up. I re-created the object using primitives and avoided
the
> > HF altogether. The object is now finite
>
> Why didn't you clip the object as I suggested? It would have made the
> object finite.
> Well, do as you wish.
>
> --
> #macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb
x]
> [1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
> -1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// -
Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Dugan <pat### [at] usnetcomcorpcom> wrote:
> Because clipping didn't work. Clipping the object as you suggested resulted
> in the object disappearing.
That only means that you clipped it in the wrong way. I asked you what
did you do, but you didn't answer.
The clipping object (eg. a box) should completely enclose the object to
be clipped. What did you do?
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here is the code as I tried it....
#declare DaggerHilt =
union {
difference {
height_field {
tga "DaggerHilt.tga"
smooth
hierarchy on
translate <-0.5, -0.5, -0.5>
rotate <-90,0,0>
scale <0.3,1,0.1>
photons {target reflection on}
}
box{<-0.2,-0.6,-0.02>,<0.2,0.6,2> pigment {rgbft <1,1,1,0,1>}
no_shadow no_reflection no_image photons {collect off}
}
}
difference {
superellipsoid {<0.10, 0.30> scale <0.033,0.11,0.045>}
cylinder{<-0.15,0,0>,<0.15,0,0>,0.015 translate <0,0.10,-0.05>}
cylinder{<-0.15,0,0>,<0.15,0,0>,0.015 translate <0,-0.10,-0.05>}
cylinder{<-0.15,0,0>,<0.15,0,0>,0.015 translate <0,0.10,0.05>}
cylinder{<-0.15,0,0>,<0.15,0,0>,0.015 translate <0,-0.10,0.05>}
translate <-0.01,0.005,-0.035>
photons {target reflection on}
}
texture {BChrome rotate z * 90}
clipped_by { box{<-5,-5,-5>,<5,5,5>}}
}
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3cab0c69@news.povray.org...
> Patrick Dugan <pat### [at] usnetcomcorpcom> wrote:
> > Because clipping didn't work. Clipping the object as you suggested
resulted
> > in the object disappearing.
>
> That only means that you clipped it in the wrong way. I asked you what
> did you do, but you didn't answer.
> The clipping object (eg. a box) should completely enclose the object to
> be clipped. What did you do?
>
> --
> #macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb
M()}}
> N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
> N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// -
Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I tested that (with some image as heightfield) and didn't see any difference
between clipping it or not (clipping didn't make anything disappear).
And by the way, you should clip the object which is infinite, this being the
first difference.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"W³odzimierz ABX Skiba" <abx### [at] babilonorg> wrote in message
news:scekau8v06bpp9boqd50hvdf473po9pa2h@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:47:29 +0200, "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > > > So a finite bounding_box _means_ a finite object.
> > >
> > > I never saw basic trick with bounding box near camera probably.
> >
> > I'm not sure what you want to say.
>
> Somehow I placed I instead of You. It's becouse of 24 hours at work.
>
> > Which trick?
>
> Currently I can't find most typical animation of this type of
trick/technic.
Best use of it I've seen is to have one object in the foreground, and
another object in the mirror. The two objects are actually placed in the
same place; one has it's bounding object in front of the camera (between
itself and the camera), and traces normally, the other has its bounding
object between the mirror and the camera (so when rays hit the mirror, the
object is traced).
...Chambers
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.323 / Virus Database: 180 - Release Date: 2/8/2002
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
