Among other things, Paris saw fit to write:

> Pov-ray uses a shading model called PHONG in the
> literature.   It models a perfect diffuse reflector that does not really
> exist in reality.   What PHONG most closely resembles is the BRDF for
> plastic, and objects rendered with this model tend to all look like
> plastic.

No, POV-Ray *can* use Phong, but doesn't need to. You can specify "diffuse",
"brilliance", "specular", "phong", "reflection", "fresnel"... No need to
use Phong if you don't want to. Moreover, you can use micronormals to
simulate effects which, in reality, are due to micronormals as well. If you
want to simulate plastic, use Phong. If you don't like it, don't use it.

> Adding specular highlights to pov-ray's phong creates a shiney plastic
> texture.  Attempting to make it look like glass always tends to look like
> plexi-glass.  The reason is simple.  Physically-based rendering models of
> glass use a fresnel term.

Don't add specular and phong, use one of them. You want Fresnel? use fresnel
in the reflection block.

-- 
light_source{9+9*x,1}camera{orthographic look_at(1-y)/4angle 30location
9/4-z*4}light_source{-9*z,1}union{box{.9-z.1+x clipped_by{plane{2+y-4*x
0}}}box{z-y-.1.1+z}box{-.1.1+x}box{.1z-.1}pigment{rgb<.8.2,1>}}//Jellby

Post a reply to this message

Paris wrote:
> I've decided to start a new thread instead of adding to the very large
> thread that exploded from my last post.   The messages ended up deviating
> from the original points anyway.

So you start a new thread because you don't want to address the issues 
raised by those who replied.

And now you repeat the same claims again - starting with a completely 
wrong explanation of a BRDF and not getting much better later.  Just 
repeating a wrong claim does not make them right.

The examples of non-POV-Ray renders you have shown show nothing 
impossible in POV-Ray.  Most of them can be easily made in much higher 
quality with POV-Ray.

> The main point of my original post (and this one) shall be repeated here for
> emphasis.  My point is that Pov-Ray is lagging behind commercial packages
> in terms of photorealism.   I then gave some examples, and suggestions for
> how we can get Pov-Ray back into a competition with these packages.

No, you gave a few links to images.  Real examples demonstrating your 
claim would require explanation what technique they demonstrate, why 
this is realistic and why there is no way to achieve the same effect in 
POV-Ray.  Of course this would require some actual in-depth knowledge of 
POV-Ray.  Note i am not saying it is impossible to find such techniques 
but with your superficial way of looking at things you won't have much 
chance.

You can easily find examples for car paint, fur, bloom or anisotropic 
highlights that look at least as realistic as the images you showed by 
searching p.b.i.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 23 Sep. 2004 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

In article <web.41d656e4221a9eda765651f90@news.povray.org> , "Paris" 
<par### [at] lycoscom> wrote:

> I've decided to start a new thread instead of adding to the very large
> thread that exploded from my last post.   The messages ended up deviating
> from the original points anyway.

Just the perfect reason to start a new thread two weeks later while not
having replied to a *single* post in the thread you originally created.

> Some of the things people had posted in their replies were just patently
> false.  I will try to address some of these things first, and I will not
> mention names, since this is a discussion forum.

So you just repeat your nonsense again, ignoring everything you were told
and try to start the same discussion over again. Great!

I no longer give you the benefit of the doubt.  Trolls are not welcome in
these newsgroups.  Please consider this as a last warning.

    Thorsten Froehlich, POV-Team

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich
e-mail: mac### [at] povrayorg

I am a member of the POV-Ray Team.
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

Jellby <jel### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> No, POV-Ray *can* use Phong, but doesn't need to. You can specify "diffuse",
> "brilliance", "specular", "phong", "reflection", "fresnel"... No need to
> use Phong if you don't want to.

  Btw, don't confuse the keyword 'phong' with the "phong illumination model",
which are rather different things.

-- 
#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

Paris <par### [at] lycoscom> wrote:
> Physically-based rendering models of glass use a fresnel term.

  Could you please explain what 'fresnel' in POV-Ray (see the documentation
for details) does differently than what you want?

> Someone's reply to my take on pov-ray's global illumination was not only
> rude and uncooth, but it was wrong as well.   Pov-ray "gathers" global
> illumination by shooting out rays in a random way based loosely on a stored
> table of directions.  Every single piece of literature on 3d graphics
> rendering calls this method *DISTRIBUTED RAY TRACING*.  (simply google
> "distributed ray tracing")  Pov-ray does not use monte carlo based
> path-tracing to simulate global illumination.

  Could you please explain us what is the difference between a
monte carlo based global illumination technique and distributed
raytracing?

>  The person who replied to me
> (whose name I will leave out here) was just dead wrong on this issue.
> Distributed ray tracing suffers from shooting rays often into completely
> dark areas of the scene.  This is a wasted calculation since just
> rgb<0,0,0> rays don't contribute anything at all to the shaded point
> mathematically.

  And how does a monte carlo method help with this problem?

  Also, you wouldn't mind explaining us how can you determine a part
of the scene is so dark that it does not contribute in the illumination
of a certain part of the scene without actually looking what is the
illumination in that dark part of the scene?

>    There is no way to completely avoid this from happening,
> but there are methods to make it happen less, such as bi-directional
> path-tracing techniques that use at least some information about the light
> coming out of the light sources.

  But light sources are not the only elements affecting the lighting of
a scene. Some surfaces may have brightness on their own, and there can
be other illuminating effects in the scene as well (eg. media).

> Someone, in their reply, asked me if I "realized the cost" of implementing
> this.  I'm not sure what that meant.  It's only slightly slower in terms of
> CPU clock cycles needed, because the slowest parts of ray-tracing (in
> general) is calculating ray intersections with surfaces, not in the
> shading.  Anyone should realize that spectral integration is a different
> *SHADING* technique not a radical overhall of the geometry.  Dispersion in
> prisms is only ONE of the things this technique gives.

  Could you please explain us how to calculate the dispersion of a prism
so that the rendering becomes "only slightly slower in terms of CPU
clock cycles needed"?

  Btw, do you have any measurement data showing that the heaviest part of
raytracing is the ray intersection process in the average scene?

> Actually that picture does not
> look like brushed metal at all to me.

  Isn't that a question of opinion?
  Your opinion seems prejudiced in that you are probably thinking like
"POV-Ray does not use this 'physically accurate model' I am thinking of
and thus this image does not look like brushed metal".

> Already POV-ray
> can calculate photorealistic blooms around light sources using atmosphere,
> but not yet around bright surface highlights. For an idea of what a bloom
> is, look at the bell tower in this image:

> http://paris1839.tripod.com/computers/afterain.jpg

  You do realize that image has been rendered with POV-Ray?

> My point is that Pov-Ray is lagging behind commercial packages
> in terms of photorealism.

  POV-Ray is not a commercial package, so what do you want?
  If you are not happy with it, then either use one of your commercial
packages (which you will pay for, naturally, if you have even the
smallest amount of honesty), or change POV-Ray to suit your needs (the
source code is available for you to modify).

  If you really want for other people to implement what you can't or
have no time to, then you might better revise your tone of voice and
get some more specific information on things.

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

From what I can see, what you are really asking for is not the functionality
of these items, because most, if not all of these things CAN be done. You
might have to work at them. What you want is a button you can push, and
have all the work done for you. 'Look, I made a box... and now it looks
like cement! Yay!' If you want it to be easy, POV is not the thing for you.
But if you're willing to read the documentation, and look at patches, you
might have a little more luck in these conversations. F'rinstance, the
MegaPov HDR patch CAN output HDR images. If you download HDRShop from
Debevec, you can alter the exposure.
At least ask questions, rather than make statements.

'Is there a way to make brushed metal?'

would probably recieve the response,

'There are several. You can try averaging many slightly rotated
micronormals. The trick is to get circlar grooves. Take a look at a vinyl
record. This is slow, but very realistic, and gives you quite a bit of
control. (In fact, this method will even give you correctly holographic
results, as I recall).  Also, I believe there is a fairly fast brushed
metal on runevision.com, but I haven't tried it.'

Which is probably much more helpful, and it doesn't even involve people
hating you.

-S

Post a reply to this message

Paris wrote:
> I've decided to start a new thread instead of adding to the very large
> thread that exploded from my last post.   The messages ended up deviating
> from the original points anyway.

WHich is ok, as your original points only point to your lack of ability 
with POV-Ray.  I have seen far more works here, done with POV-Ray, than 
I have seen done with your megabuck modelers, that look realistic.

Global lighting, try Poser if you want to find out what an abortion 
global lighting can be.  It is so restricted as to be totally useless, 
and is the reason I don't render anything in poser.  I *like* having 
good control over the lighting, and being able to reproduce the effects 
from a single source, rather than "the entire heavens radiate in all 
directions."  If I want that effect, which I don't, I'll put everything 
inside a hollow white sphere to get it, which is hardly worth the trouble.

Brushed metal, being as I make real brushed metal on occasion, I am a 
toolmaker, I think I know what's realistic and what isn't, NONE of them 
you can come up with are.

Final, it's very easy to criticize when you're not involved with the 
programming.  If you aren't satisfied with it, use something like 3DMAX. 
  Or maybe they just dont bitch because they're ashamed to admit that 
they spent the kilobucks for something that still won't do what they 
*think* it should.

OH, BTW, "Plonk."

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>>http://paris1839.tripod.com/computers/afterain.jpg
>   You do realize that image has been rendered with POV-Ray?

ooooooh...I wanna know how that was done *drool*

-- 
Tim Cook
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-empyrean

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

Tim Cook wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> 
>>> http://paris1839.tripod.com/computers/afterain.jpg
>>
>>   You do realize that image has been rendered with POV-Ray?
> 
> 
> ooooooh...I wanna know how that was done *drool*
> 


Third place in the July-August 1998 IRTC Stills competition:
http://www.irtc.org/stills/1998-08-31.html

Description:
http://oz.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/1998-08-31/afterain.txt

Source:
http://oz.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/1998-08-31/afterain.zip

Post a reply to this message

Paris, a couple of the things you showed can be done on POV-Ray as is.

> CAR PAINT------
> In contra to the person who replied to me, car paint is not "just paint".
> Car paint can sometimes contain tiny glitters in laquer that sparkle when
> an object is turned in the light.  It also has a sort of metallic sheen
> that the phong model cannot simulate that falls off to nearly black at
> shallow viewing angles.  CEBAS's FinalRender simulates all of these.   See:
>
> http://www.finalrender.com/products/images/finalShaders/fR-carpaint_01.jpg
>
> Notice the "falling off to black" at shallow angles.  It's hard to notice at
> first but when you see it it should look like a very quick turn to black at
> the edges of curves.   Pov-ray cannot simulate car paint.  But like I said
> in my original post, it would be nice to see in future versions.
Its been said by others, but Tek has made an awesome metallic paint macro.
Check P.B.S-F to find it

> FUR/SUEDE/VELVET-----
> Hair is implementable with tricks, but suede and tight, tiny fur is a
> procedural texture requiring code all to itself.   Fur will often have
> anamolous dark spots on the insides of concave surfaces, where the 'hairs'
> are more bunched togethor.  And it will look slightly brighter on convex
> parts of a surface since the 'hairs' are less dense.  In suede, this
> happens at the microfacet level, so it cannot be simulated ad-hoc with
> millions of tiny objects.   Again, CEBAS's FinalRender gives the most
> striking example I've ever seen which contains all of the attributes I
> mentioned:
>
> http://www.finalrender.com/products/images/finalShaders/fR-DistanceFur_02.jpg
>
> To reiterate, it would be nice to see such things implemented in future
> versions of POV.  But I make no demands.
You don't say why it can't be done with current POV-Ray. Megapov has a fur
feature and Rune also made a very good fur texture. I don't see why it
can't be done now.

Brushed metal has been done before. Jaime Vives Piqueres's "Still With
Bolts" is an excelent example of photorealistic brushed metal. You just
need to average randomly rotated normals.

Also, megapov has an exposure feature to it. I don't see how it can't
perform the same function you were suggesting.

>http://www.maxwellrender.com/indexeng.html
All of the pictures you showed can be done on POV. Some of them can be done
better (that "brushed metal" tire rim being a prime example). Its been said
before, POV-Ray is free and open-source. Despite it being supported by
people in their free time, its still comparable, and sometimes better, than
those slick-looking commerical products. The only software you showed that
stuck out in my mind was Maxwell, and thats not coming out for a while.

A lot of your ideas do sound interesting, such as spectral integration and
BRDF. However, it sounds like you're going to have to develop them yourself
if you want them done, or at the very least give more detail into how they
can be implemented. After all, they're your suggestions, so its not
unreasonable to want you to do a good amount of work.

Post a reply to this message

"Tom Galvin" <tom### [at] impnospamorg> a écrit dans le message de
news:41d7151f$1@news.povray.org...
> Tim Cook wrote:
> > Warp wrote:
> >
> >>> http://paris1839.tripod.com/computers/afterain.jpg
> >>
> >>   You do realize that image has been rendered with POV-Ray?
> >
> >
> > ooooooh...I wanna know how that was done *drool*
> >
>
>
> Third place in the July-August 1998 IRTC Stills competition:
> http://www.irtc.org/stills/1998-08-31.html
>
> Description:
> http://oz.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/1998-08-31/afterain.txt
>
> Source:
> http://oz.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/1998-08-31/afterain.zip

Here is POV spirit!!!! Share!!!


Marc

Post a reply to this message

"Tim Cook" <z99### [at] bellsouthnet> a écrit dans le message de
news:41d7026d$1@news.povray.org...
> Warp wrote:
> >>http://paris1839.tripod.com/computers/afterain.jpg
> >   You do realize that image has been rendered with POV-Ray?
>
> ooooooh...I wanna know how that was done *drool*
RTFM ;-) or ask questions  ( not for you Tim)

Marc

Post a reply to this message

Paris wrote:

> http://www.caligari.com/products/truespace/ts4/images/reflectance-med.jpg

Umm, There are techniques to do this in POVRay easily (quickly or 
accurately.. your choice:

http://www.dpalbum-online.com/mraiford/povray/images/910 -- Accurate, 
but a bit slow

http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:http%3A//runevision.com/show.asp%3Fid%3D217 
-- Very fast to render. Pardon the Google Cache, Rune's page appears to 
be down.

> http://www.finalrender.com/products/images/finalShaders/fR-carpaint_01.jpg

Believe it or not, There is a setting in POVRay for reflections called 
fresnel that gives the exact effect you're talking about

> http://www.finalrender.com/products/images/finalShaders/fR-DistanceFur_02.jpg
> 

http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:http%3A//runevision.com/show.asp%3Fid%3D215

Gee... Could this be what you were talking about??!

> http://paris1839.tripod.com/computers/afterain.jpg

I don't quite understand what is particularly striking about the above 
image. IMO it's particularly mundane, and doesn't even deserve mention 
in your attempt to bash POV-Ray.

> The main point of my original post (and this one) shall be repeated here for
> emphasis.  My point is that Pov-Ray is lagging behind commercial packages
> in terms of photorealism.   I then gave some examples, and suggestions for

Our point is POV-Ray is *NOT* a commercial render. Its a volunteer 
effort by people gracious enough to spend their spare time working on a 
top-notch *raytracer* Feel free to write a patch and share it with us, 
if you think its so far behind... But I believe theres even a renderman 
compliant patch out there. somethint called POVMan, google for it.

> how we can get Pov-Ray back into a competition with these packages.  Some
> of these are very simple to implement (EXPOSURE_OUTPUT),  others are not

If they're so easy to implement, then by all means, have at it... But if 
you're just attempting to whine "Its easy, why isnt (insert commerical 
renderer's feature here) implemented." then your best course of action 
would be to shut up. Maybe it is easy, maybe not. If you have any 
experience in software development, you'd know what was easy. If you 
don't, then you're not qualified to have such an opinion, are you?

Most of the images you've presented here are extraordinarily trivial to 
produce with the current official version of POVRay ... We're sorry if 
we can't sprinkle magic dust and make it happen for you. You actually 
have to climb down off your high horse and read occasionally to get it.

>  To get a rough idea of what spectral integration + iris simulation alone
> can give you, you might want to start here.  And in particular the
> architecture part of the gallery:


> http://www.maxwellrender.com/indexeng.html

What, something like this?:

as for "iris simulation" ... what a buzzword, let me tell ya':

Do you happen to mean something like... ... focal blur.

POVRay has it, its accurate and works like a champ. But it doesn't 
translate exactly to f-stops, but I'm sure you could figure that out.

http://www.ignorancia.org/lightsys.php

> 
> --
> Paris
> 
> 
> 
>

Post a reply to this message

Paris wrote:

Nevermind that last post I made, its perfectly obvious you don't pay 
attention. You're an idiot.

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

>>http://paris1839.tripod.com/computers/afterain.jpg
> 
> 
>   You do realize that image has been rendered with POV-Ray?

LMAO

Post a reply to this message

I have been looking into Architectural Rendering for some time now. I have 
produced images for very successful clients and currently I am looking into 
making this a living. All the clients I have spoken with want photo-realism. 
I have given them sample images rendered with Pov-Ray. They don't care what 
package I use. They just want results. The results I give them they can't 
buy at the other commercial houses. I trained with the experts of 3D Studio, 
VIZ render, and others who all claimed those packages could do everything 
Pov can do. I've never met anyone that could generate the potential quality 
of Pov-Ray images with other packeges. They all do excellent jobs. As you 
can see, though, the people that actually use the software can tell the 
difference.

I've used Pov-Ray for (I think) eleven years now. I learned right away that 
there is a steep learning curve.  The other packages have the 'whiz-bang' 
buttons and texture libraries with one-click application that make even a 
newcomer feel like an expert after a single week, or so. Quess what? It 
ain't so.

Pov-Ray isn't about instant gratification. Until you've sat through a few 
hour-long renders you have no idea what I mean, but you'll figure it out. 
Just saddle up for a long stay and invest the time it takes to get good. 
Expect to see a lot of trash renders; it happens to the best of us.

Individuals that hang out here on povray.org tend to be more helpful than 
insulting. So, if you find yourself arguing or disliked maybe your attitude 
is showing. Pov-Ray people have always been helpful and willing to share 
code at the drop of a hat (and they'll often drop the hat), if that tells 
you anything.

If, you don't care to spend the time it takes, then just remember the door 
swings both ways. I recommend Truespace as a good starting place. They still 
have a free version for download (albeit dated).

Good luck

- Grim

Post a reply to this message

Oh brother, that resumes it all!!  Amen!
I'll second that.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Michael Raiford <mra### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > http://paris1839.tripod.com/computers/afterain.jpg

> I don't quite understand what is particularly striking about the above 
> image. IMO it's particularly mundane, and doesn't even deserve mention 
> in your attempt to bash POV-Ray.

  Specially since that image has been rendered with POV-Ray.

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

In article <web.41d80f0bb331cac5765651f90@news.povray.org> , "Paris" 
<par### [at] lycoscom> wrote:

> I think you are missing the forest for the trees here.  What my suggestion
> was that instead of having the user tweak these coefficients all day long
> until they ACCIDENTLY STUMBLE upon glass or eggshell
<snip>
> suggesting they simply package these things with the engine, in addition to
> all the other things they already have.

There is glass.inc .

Your troll post has been removed.

    Thorsten Froehlich, POV-Team


____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich
e-mail: mac### [at] povrayorg

I am a member of the POV-Ray Team.
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

In article <web.41d81646b331cac5765651f90@news.povray.org> , "Paris" 
<par### [at] lycoscom> wrote:

> "Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
>> So you just repeat your nonsense again, ignoring everything you were told
>> and try to start the same discussion over again. Great!
>>
>> I no longer give you the benefit of the doubt.  Trolls are not welcome in
>> these newsgroups.  Please consider this as a last warning.
>>
>
> I respectfully apologize for not addressing each and every post.  I swear to
> you that I'm not a troll and that I know what I'm talking about, and that I
> know what I'm saying makes sense.   I was unaware that there were unspoken
> "house rules" on this forum, such as the rule where I have to quote and
> reply.  For now on and forever into the future I will reply to each and
> every post that is made if this is what is required of me to post here.  I
> will include the exact sentences that I am replying to also.
>
> With my deepest humblest apologies,

There is no need to apologize if you are not a troll, just a serious need
for you to learn how to figure out when you know nothing about something.
You have demonstrated that you clearly do not know what you are talking
about in all your posts so far.  So unless you want to continue to appear
like a troll (which you claim you are not), then I can only recommend you
quickly learn when to shut up and first learn at least a tiny bit about the
topic your are talking about.

Many have told your friendly that you know nothing, but you did not take
that hint.  So let me help you:

You obviously know absolutely nothing about POV-Ray, you did not even take a
look at the user manual, you link to images created with POV-Ray and say
they are not (the image text tells!), and the throwing around of buzzwords
without being able to explain their meaning at all clearly shows you know
nothing about rendering.

You should have decided to shut up after you read the replies to your first
post and prior to making your second post that started this thread.

    Thorsten Froehlich, POV-Team

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich
e-mail: mac### [at] povrayorg

I am a member of the POV-Ray Team.
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

in news:web.41d814dfb331cac5765651f90@news.povray.org Paris wrote:

> TRICKS TWEAKS DOES NOT SIMULATE THEM APPROACHING 

Sorry Paris, but I've no clue what you try to acheive here. Those pro 
packages also use tricks tweaks etc. only their marketing calls them 
'physically-based'. Tell me, for example, the 'trick' we use for brushed 
metal, are the tiny normals not 'physically-based'? Aren't BSDF curves a 
way to simulate the properties of a material instead of modelling them?
If you want to approach 'physically-based' rendering, start with the 
modelling. All these technologies that emerge are ways to get around 
modelling the finest details and implementing real light laws.

Yes, POV-Ray lacks behind. Yet there is no package with the same feature 
set an versatility. There are many render engines that are very good at 
some things, and that is what I notice with the pro's, depending on the 
goals you pick the engine.

Yes, POV-Ray lacks behind in many respects. But all we have to do is to 
wait untill someone writes the code to implement a new feature, not 
spend big bucks to buy yet another engine with some new feature.

... and then, what is photo realism worth ....? 

Ingo

Post a reply to this message

Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> There is glass.inc .

...which has the iors set at 1.5, and the dispersion of some set at not 
the ior (iirc for a single value representing the diffraction in a 
material, the ior should be used).

My table of IORs has the following entries:
Glass____________________1.51714
Glass, Albite____________1.489
Glass, Crown_____________1.52
Glass, Crown, Zinc_______1.517
Glass, Flint, Dense______1.66
Glass, Flint, Heaviest___1.89
Glass, Flint, Heavy______1.65548
Glass, Flint, Lanthanum__1.8
Glass, Flint, Light______1.58038
Glass, Flint, Medium_____1.62725

Personally, I think many of the posters in this thread being a bit 
immature and unnecessarily caustic in their messages.  The only 
difference between them is one of them is an admin and wields power.  So 
I kindly request that we tone it down a notch, kids.

-- 
Tim Cook
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-empyrean

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

In article <41d869ff$1@news.povray.org> , Tim Cook <z99### [at] bellsouthnet>
wrote:

> Personally, I think many of the posters in this thread being a bit
> immature and unnecessarily caustic in their messages.  The only
> difference between them is one of them is an admin and wields power.

No, the problem was that the original poster was a troll.  The messages that
clearly identified him as such have been removed now, so you likely missed
them...

    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:
> No, the problem was that the original poster was a troll.  The messages that
> clearly identified him as such have been removed now, so you likely missed
> them...

I believe I read the original posts.  They *were* a bit immature and 
unnecessarily caustic.  They may have been a troll, but they also may 
have been simply a misguided and very awkward attempt at expressing the 
questions of the poster without intending to incite an argument.  You 
quoted an article in which Paris apologizes for any misunderstandings, 
and then proceed to bash him, saying that he is, in effect, a moron. 
Who's the troll then?  Like I said before, tone it down a notch.

-- 
Tim Cook
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-empyrean

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> 
> 
> No, the problem was that the original poster was a troll.  
> 

An opinion not universally shared.  I believe that Paris meant well, but 
presented poorly, had poor comprehesion of povray, and the misread the 
mores of the local culture.  I was disappointed in the lack of tact in a 
"few" of the responses.

BDW was a troll.

Post a reply to this message

In article <41d876e2$1@news.povray.org> , Tim Cook <z99### [at] bellsouthnet>
wrote:

>  You
> quoted an article in which Paris apologizes for any misunderstandings,
> and then proceed to bash him, saying that he is, in effect, a moron.

He had already started to post another batch of messages, which you unlikely
saw as they were removed really quickly.

> Who's the troll then?  Like I said before, tone it down a notch.

I think you are out of line here and making a judgement without enough
information.

    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:
> Tim Cook wrote:
>
>> You quoted an article in which Paris apologizes for
>> any misunderstandings, and then proceed to bash him,
>> saying that he is, in effect, a moron.
>
> He had already started to post another batch of
> messages, which you unlikely saw as they were removed
> really quickly.
>
>> Who's the troll then?  Like I said before, tone it
>> down a notch.
>
> I think you are out of line here and making a judgement
> without enough information.

And that information is not available for others anymore. What an admirably 
effective way of brushing off the issue. There presumably was this crystal 
clear evidence that he was a troll, and the possibility of anyone 
questioning if he was indeed a troll or not have "really quickly" been 
removed.

Rune
-- 
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
rune|vision:  http://runevision.com
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

In article <41d88142$1@news.povray.org> , "Rune" <run### [at] runevisioncom>
wrote:

> And that information is not available for others anymore. What an admirably
> effective way of brushing off the issue. There presumably was this crystal
> clear evidence that he was a troll, and the possibility of anyone
> questioning if he was indeed a troll or not have "really quickly" been
> removed.

Well, first I would like to remind you that that judgement is not up to you
in the first place.  However, I am sorry the solution to the troll problem
does not make everybody happy.

    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" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message 
news:41d88619$1@news.povray.org...
> In article <41d88142$1@news.povray.org> , "Rune" <run### [at] runevisioncom>
> wrote:
>
>> And that information is not available for others anymore. What an 
>> admirably
>> effective way of brushing off the issue. There presumably was this 
>> crystal
>> clear evidence that he was a troll, and the possibility of anyone
>> questioning if he was indeed a troll or not have "really quickly" been
>> removed.
>
> Well, first I would like to remind you that that judgement is not up to 
> you
> in the first place.  However, I am sorry the solution to the troll problem
> does not make everybody happy.
>


Who did you make happy when you removed his posts (aside from yourself)? 
After having had one of my posts removed where I said "You are wrong," I 
really have to wonder whose interests you have in mind.  If Paris was way 
out of line, now you've removed all of the evidence, which makes many of us 
truly wonder what's going on.

IMHO, you're not making anyone look good, except perhaps Paris.

-- 
Jeremy
www.beantoad.com

Post a reply to this message

In article <41d88e76$1@news.povray.org> , "Jeremy M. Praay" 
<sla### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:

> After having had one of my posts removed where I said "You are wrong," I
> really have to wonder whose interests you have in mind.

Such a false claim and what you want to imply by it is really insulting.

    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

Warp wrote:
>   Specially since that image has been rendered with POV-Ray.

Yeah, LOL.. I noticed that after you pointed it out :)

Post a reply to this message

Tom Galvin wrote:

> An opinion not universally shared.  I believe that Paris meant well, but 
> presented poorly, had poor comprehesion of povray, and the misread the 
> mores of the local culture.  I was disappointed in the lack of tact in a 
> "few" of the responses.

I completely dissagree with you. I have to side with Thorsten on this 
particular issue. He was a complete troll. And -- yeah, I tossed a few 
bread crumbs his way, so I'm just as guilty.

I don't think there was a well meaning bone in his body when he made the 
post. Its apparently either a whining session or a post with malace. Had 
he approached with the attitude of, "I think I have some ideas, here's 
what I've worked on, and I think I can make it work" The response would 
have been much less abrasive. But, instead, he comes by with the 
attitude that every *commercial* renderer out there is flawless and why 
can't POV-Ray do (insert favorite scanline-rendering technique here)?

The problem is not that he was innocently making a wrong assertion in 
attempting to do something, but completely bashing a tool we all enjoy 
using.

> BDW was a troll.

I wish I had known him when he was posting before he was killbanned. Ohh 
well.

Post a reply to this message

"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote:

> Well, first I would like to remind you that that judgement is not up to you
> in the first place.  However, I am sorry the solution to the troll problem
> does not make everybody happy.

I think it's a big mistake to remove posts of this nature.
Surely POV-Ray is big enough to take a few poorly-placed
punches? Troll or not, it has sparked some interesting
discussion. Removing the post only gives it more weight.

-Mark Slone

Post a reply to this message

Michael Raiford wrote:
> I wish I had known him when he was posting before he was killbanned. Ohh 
> well.

He wasn't.  He was warned, and decided to take his shovel and play in 
another sandbox.

-- 
Tim Cook
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-empyrean

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
>>Who's the troll then?  Like I said before, tone it down a notch.
> I think you are out of line here and making a judgement without enough
> information.

Fair enough, but requesting that things be toned down a notch is hardly 
unreasonable.

Can't we all just get along?

-- 
Tim Cook
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-empyrean

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

Michael Raiford wrote:
> 
> I completely dissagree with you. I have to side with Thorsten on this 
> particular issue. He was a complete troll. And -- yeah, I tossed a few 
> bread crumbs his way, so I'm just as guilty.
> 
> I don't think there was a well meaning bone in his body when he made the 
> post. Its apparently either a whining session or a post with malace. 

I read all his posts.  Inculding the multiple ones where he apologized 
for misunderstandings.  Stated clearly that he was not demanding 
anything, rather making suggestions for improvement(however misguided in 
tone or content), and acknowledged misunderstandings over terminology 
usage.

There was a similar dust-up several months ago over Open-GL and Scanline 
rendering with a lot of initial resisitance, and a few rude remarks.

http://news.povray.org/povray.general/thread/%3C3eda5cd8$1@news.povray.org%3E/

That poster a few weeks later released a OpenGL wireframe preview patch

http://www.daylongraphics.com/other/povray/patches/index.htm

> 
> The problem is not that he was innocently making a wrong assertion in 
> attempting to do something, but completely bashing a tool we all enjoy 
> using.
> 

Paris did not use profanity, or deride the povray authors ancestry.  His 
critiques were specific, and he used the commercial packages as 
references for feature comparisons.  IMHO, this newsgroup could use a 
little more tolerance to alternate viewpoints and newcomers.

If you read his website you would see that he is actually a fan of POV-Ray.

http://paris1839.tripod.com/computers/computiary.html


>> BDW was a troll.
> 
> 
> I wish I had known him when he was posting before he was killbanned. Ohh 
> well.

He left of his own accord.

Post a reply to this message

Michael Raiford wrote:
> Tom Galvin wrote:
> 
>> An opinion not universally shared.  I believe that Paris meant well, 
>> but presented poorly, had poor comprehesion of povray, and the misread 
>> the mores of the local culture.  I was disappointed in the lack of 
>> tact in a "few" of the responses.
> 
> 
> I completely dissagree with you. I have to side with Thorsten on this 
> particular issue. He was a complete troll. And -- yeah, I tossed a few 
> bread crumbs his way, so I'm just as guilty.

I'll also side with Thorsten, although I rarely do otherwise.  There may 
be "features" in commercial software, and I normally use another 
modeler, but my renders are in POV-Ray every time, simply for the 
control over effects that it has, simply, easily, and with some 
practice, not much guesswork either.

Greybeard

Post a reply to this message

Tom Galvin wrote:
> Michael Raiford wrote:
> 
>>
>> I completely dissagree with you. I have to side with Thorsten on this 
>> particular issue. He was a complete troll. And -- yeah, I tossed a few 
>> bread crumbs his way, so I'm just as guilty.
>>
>> I don't think there was a well meaning bone in his body when he made 
>> the post. Its apparently either a whining session or a post with malace. 
> 
> 
> I read all his posts.  Inculding the multiple ones where he apologized 
> for misunderstandings.  Stated clearly that he was not demanding 
> anything, rather making suggestions for improvement(however misguided in 
> tone or content), and acknowledged misunderstandings over terminology 
> usage.
> 
> There was a similar dust-up several months ago over Open-GL and Scanline 
> rendering with a lot of initial resisitance, and a few rude remarks.
> 
> http://news.povray.org/povray.general/thread/%3C3eda5cd8$1@news.povray.org%3E/ 

Maybe its me, but... his tone seemed a bit less...hostile than the tone 
Paris has used.

> 
> That poster a few weeks later released a OpenGL wireframe preview patch
> 
> http://www.daylongraphics.com/other/povray/patches/index.htm

Thats a kinda cool patch. Much like Moray's preview I would imagine

> Paris did not use profanity, or deride the povray authors ancestry.  His 
> critiques were specific, and he used the commercial packages as 
> references for feature comparisons.  IMHO, this newsgroup could use a 
> little more tolerance to alternate viewpoints and newcomers.

After reading the responses to the OGL Post above, I'd have to say... 
yes, you're right on that count.

> If you read his website you would see that he is actually a fan of POV-Ray.
> 
> http://paris1839.tripod.com/computers/computiary.html

Hmm. so he does actually like POVRay.. thats actually suprising, but he 
appears to be a bit of a blowhard, even his tone on his webpage seems a 
bit agressive.. more of a "Look at me, I can do better than the original 
artist" Not taking into account that the chessboard image was actually 
created long ago and has not been since updated.

>>> BDW was a troll.
>>
>>
>>
>> I wish I had known him when he was posting before he was killbanned. 
>> Ohh well.
> 
> 
> He left of his own accord.

Hmm, so I have been told multiple times. I thought he was banned from 
the servers much like IMBJR was.

Post a reply to this message

Renderdog wrote:

> I think it's a big mistake to remove posts of this nature.
> Surely POV-Ray is big enough to take a few poorly-placed
> punches? Troll or not, it has sparked some interesting
> discussion. Removing the post only gives it more weight.

I tend to agree. Though I disagree, it would have been nice to see the 
repliesm unless they were particularly insulting or profane.

Post a reply to this message

"Tom Galvin" <tom### [at] impnospamorg> wrote in message
news:41d8baca$1@news.povray.org...
> Michael Raiford wrote:
> >
> > I completely dissagree with you. I have to side with Thorsten on this
> > particular issue. He was a complete troll. And -- yeah, I tossed a few
> > bread crumbs his way, so I'm just as guilty.
> >
> > I don't think there was a well meaning bone in his body when he made the
> > post. Its apparently either a whining session or a post with malace.
>
> I read all his posts.  Inculding the multiple ones where he apologized
> for misunderstandings.  Stated clearly that he was not demanding
> anything, rather making suggestions for improvement(however misguided in
> tone or content), and acknowledged misunderstandings over terminology
> usage.
>
> There was a similar dust-up several months ago over Open-GL and Scanline
> rendering with a lot of initial resisitance, and a few rude remarks.
>
>
http://news.povray.org/povray.general/thread/%3C3eda5cd8$1@news.povray.org%3E/
>
> That poster a few weeks later released a OpenGL wireframe preview patch
>
> http://www.daylongraphics.com/other/povray/patches/index.htm
>
> >
> > The problem is not that he was innocently making a wrong assertion in
> > attempting to do something, but completely bashing a tool we all enjoy
> > using.
> >
>
> Paris did not use profanity, or deride the povray authors ancestry.  His
> critiques were specific, and he used the commercial packages as
> references for feature comparisons.  IMHO, this newsgroup could use a
> little more tolerance to alternate viewpoints and newcomers.
>
> If you read his website you would see that he is actually a fan of
POV-Ray.
>
> http://paris1839.tripod.com/computers/computiary.html
>
>
> >> BDW was a troll.
> >
> >
> > I wish I had known him when he was posting before he was killbanned. Ohh
> > well.
>
> He left of his own accord.

I agree with Tom completely.

*My* personal opinion is that Thorsten isn't taking the best approach with
the attitude of his response and the action he took in removing the post.  I
think the attitude being displayed is completely unnecessary.  Trying to
belittle and call into question the mental capacity of people who are only
trying to make positive suggestions, instigate discussion on rendering
techniques or implement interesting patches, is very poor behaviour.  If
someone is perceived as being a troll, there is always the option to ignore
them - simply attacking the person personally is as bad, if not worse, than
trolling.  If posts are going to be removed, then critical responses should
also be removed - in my opinion.

The attitudes of some people here greatly disappoint me, especially for a
group of people of such high intellect.

Insulting responses do damage to the great effort that POV-Ray is, and the
tireless work and respect of the other POV Team members, TAG, other patch
developers and end users who provide user-to-user support here, who many not
want to be painted with the brush of elitism that's being brandished.

I sincerely hope that Thorsten's remarks, despite him using the POV Team
after his name, are taken as his personal remarks alone and not taken as
representing the attitude or opinions of the entire POV Team.  I know some
of the POV Team members personally, and I know that they would not want to
be portrayed in this way.

In all the time I've been reading and participating on this server over the
last 6 years, it has been very rare to find such degrading replies, and I
feel personally *embarrassed* that the community is represented in this way.

Lance.

thezone - thezone.firewave.com.au
thehandle - www.thehandle.com

Post a reply to this message

Tom Galvin wrote:

> If you read his website you would see that he is actually a fan of POV-Ray.
> 
> http://paris1839.tripod.com/computers/computiary.html
> 
> 

Wow.  I admit I am a little surprised.  My gut take on it was that he 
was not sincere ( ie a "troll" ).  I feel kinda bad.  Only thing.  On 
his page he does come off as a bit egotistical.  Not a bad thing, 
necessarily, only I do wonder...well, as my brother would say, "Don't 
worry, he's probably used to it."

Post a reply to this message

Michael Raiford wrote:

>> Specially since that image has been rendered with POV-Ray.
>  
> Yeah, LOL.. I noticed that after you pointed it out :)

Except that he never claimed it's _not_ rendered with POV-Ray, did he? 
It was his example to demonstrate what "a bloom" is...

Severi S.

Post a reply to this message

Severi Salminen <sev### [at] not_thissibafi> wrote:
> Except that he never claimed it's _not_ rendered with POV-Ray, did he? 
> It was his example to demonstrate what "a bloom" is...

  He said that POV-Ray is unable to render "blooms" and then gave an image
to demonstrate what a "bloom" is.
  Since this image was rendered with POV-Ray, there's an ironic contradiction
in that.

-- 
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Severi Salminen <sev### [at] not_thissibafi> wrote:

>   He said that POV-Ray is unable to render "blooms" and then gave an image
> to demonstrate what a "bloom" is.
>   Since this image was rendered with POV-Ray, there's an ironic contradiction
> in that.

This is what he said:

"Already POV-ray can calculate photorealistic blooms around light 
sources using atmosphere, but not yet around bright surface highlights. 
For an idea of what a bloom is, look at the bell tower in this image."

Obviously he had two different kinds of blooms in mind. It is not clear 
whether he used the image to demonstrate these "atmospheric blooms" or 
"highlight blooms" - whatever he meant with them. If the latter or both, 
then there is a contradiction, if the first then there is not. But how 
can we find that out anymore.

Maybe he wanted POV-Ray to simulate these blooms without using media 
(some post-processing step) or something...

PS. I'm not trying to guess what "a bloom" is or isn't and how it can or 
can't be modeled in POV-Ray.

S.S.

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   He said that POV-Ray is unable to render "blooms" and then gave an image
> to demonstrate what a "bloom" is.

Perhaps he meant that there isn't a easy or convenient way to render 
blooms with POV...unless you know how the effect is accomplished, or at 
least have a general idea, there isn't a good way to use trial-and-error 
with POV and hope you stumble on the right thing, because test renders 
take so long.  Commercial applications have preset effects where the 
user can just click a button.  Probably the best solution with POV would 
be to have a set of official 'feature comparison' scenes?

-- 
Tim Cook
http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-empyrean

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

"GrimDude" <a36### [at] bellsouthnet> wrote in message 
news:41d79434$1@news.povray.org...
> Individuals that hang out here on povray.org tend to be more helpful than 
> insulting. So, if you find yourself arguing or disliked maybe your 
> attitude is showing. Pov-Ray people have always been helpful and willing 
> to share code at the drop of a hat (and they'll often drop the hat), if 
> that tells you anything.

    Generally speaking I would agree with you, however (referring back to 
this thread)  a little "grip" getting is needed on both sides of the isle.
I dropped out of the POV Comp because of the bickering about the rules etc. 
Used to be a unix sys admin so I know users can be a bit trying at times. I 
've also been called Atilla(sp) the Admin , so I can honestly say I've seen 
both sides of the coin.

> If, you don't care to spend the time it takes, then just remember the door 
> swings both ways.

Would rather hang here .... learned alot, and picked up a few cool code 
fragments here.

I vote for fewer flames and more code and discussions

Peace

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 07:34:19 -0400, "Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] hotmailcom>
wrote:
> I vote for fewer flames and more code and discussions

Note that starting new thread without answering any of the well argumented and
educational posts of previous thread is first syndrome of _lack_ of
discussion. I admit it is not pleasure to read this thread but I think that
user almost asked for it. Both, action and reaction, makes me ... :-(

ABX

Post a reply to this message

"Tim Cook" <z99### [at] bellsouthnet> wrote in message 
news:41d90fec$1@news.povray.org...
> Warp wrote:
>>   He said that POV-Ray is unable to render "blooms" and then gave an 
>> image
>> to demonstrate what a "bloom" is.
>
> Perhaps he meant that there isn't a easy or convenient way to render 
> blooms with POV...unless you know how the effect is accomplished, or at 
> least have a general idea, there isn't a good way to use trial-and-error 
> with POV and hope you stumble on the right thing, because test renders 
> take so long.  Commercial applications have preset effects where the user 
> can just click a button.  <snip>

I was hoping that's where this discussion would head.  POV-Ray can do a lot 
of amazing things, but it's difficult to understand how to do many of them, 
not only at first glance, but even after using the program for several 
years.  Jaime's Lightsys has many things built-in that are what I believe 
Paris meant by "physically based."  It's not part of POV-Ray, but it is 
still possible in POV-Ray.  Nevertheless, Lightsys is not something that I 
would ever be able to create myself.  And even though it already exists, I'm 
still trying to figure out how to use it effectively.

POV-Ray "can" do a lot of incredibly photo-realistic things, but they're not 
readily accessible to the new-user, and even people like me (using < 3 
years) have a difficult time grasping many of the concepts.  Building some 
external features into an interface would be a really nifty idea, imho. 
Kind of like how Gena built POV-Tree around TomTree.  Having a bunch of 
those lumped together into a single cohesive program (like MegaPov) would be 
even cooler.

Sometimes, these discussions remind me of Linux/Windows discussions.  I 
don't use Linux anymore, but I have played around with it quite a bit. 
Linux "can" (probably) do everything Windows XP can do, and then some. 
Nevertheless, I find it difficult to use and maintain.  There are a lot of 
things happening that I don't care to know about.  Windows XP takes care of 
those things so that I don't have to care about them (at least ideally).  I 
would never suggest that my mom start using Linux.  Anyway, my point was not 
to start a Windows/Linux discussion, but to provide an analogy.  POV-Ray 
does not fit many people coming from an artistic, but less technical 
background.  Perhaps it shouldn't.  But having the discussion should not 
hurt.

-- 
Jeremy
www.beantoad.com

Post a reply to this message

Tim Cook <z99### [at] bellsouthnet> wrote:

> Perhaps he meant that there isn't a easy or convenient way to render
> blooms with POV...unless you know how the effect is accomplished, or at
> least have a general idea, there isn't a good way to use trial-and-error
> with POV and hope you stumble on the right thing, because test renders
> take so long.  Commercial applications have preset effects where the
> user can just click a button.  Probably the best solution with POV would
> be to have a set of official 'feature comparison' scenes?

I'd like to see something like
http://www.f-lohmueller.de/pov_tut/addon/insert65.htm
carried further, a documentation website with lots of
short code examples and pictures, including the latest
features and the many possibilities.

Mike Williams isosurface tutorial
http://www.econym.demon.co.uk/isotut/index.htm
is an excellent resource for many of POV-Ray's features.

Christoph's tutorials
http://www-public.tu-bs.de:8080/~y0013390/pov/tutorials.html
are excellent also.

Obviously a project that would include most or all of
POV-Ray's features and abilities would be extensive,
requiring a lot of work and cooperation. Maybe it's
a pipe dream, but I plan to make a stab at starting
something like that some day, if someone else
doesn't beat me to it :-).

Post a reply to this message

Renderdog wrote:

> 
> Obviously a project that would include most or all of
> POV-Ray's features and abilities would be extensive,
> requiring a lot of work and cooperation. Maybe it's
> a pipe dream, but I plan to make a stab at starting
> something like that some day, if someone else
> doesn't beat me to it :-).
> 

IMHO, if http://book.povworld.org/ was

	converted/migrated/replaced/supplemented

by a wiki, then it would scratch a lot of itches.

Post a reply to this message