 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 09:53:50 -0800, mer### [at] stonehenge com (Randal L. Schwartz)
wrote:
>>>>>> "Stephen" == Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> writes:
>
>Stephen> I enjoyed the broadcast but what a pair of bankers the hosts are.
>
>Stephen> What is a senior dude FFS?
>
>Tell me what a "banker" is, and I'll tell you what a "senior dude" is.
Drat! I'm sorry I did not mean to be rude to you. I did not realise that you
were one of the hosts. Put it down to my age and being a Brit. I still stand by
my opinion about the way people speak but I apologise to you for being
personally rude.
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>>>> "Stephen" == Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> writes:
Stephen> Or I'm just amazed that they used the term, even
I'm still a kid at heart. And I was stumbling to insert words before the
moment passed.
I think it's because I had just seen "The Big Lebowski" on cable, where "dude"
is said about 100 times, including the catchphrase "the dude, abides".
I'm surprised you keep saying "they" when you're talking to me. :)
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<mer### [at] stonehengecom> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I think it's because I had just seen "The Big Lebowski" on cable, where
> "dude"
> is said about 100 times
I think that's a huge understatement, dude :p
great show btw!
cu!
--
#macro G(b,e)b+(e-b)*C/50#end#macro _(b,e,k,l)#local C=0;#while(C<50)
sphere{G(b,e)+3*z.1pigment{rgb G(k,l)}finish{ambient 1}}#local C=C+1;
#end#end _(y-x,y,x,x+y)_(y,-x-y,x+y,y)_(-x-y,-y,y,y+z)_(-y,y,y+z,x+y)
_(0x+y.5+y/2x)_(0x-y.5+y/2x) // ZK http://www.povplace.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:33:47 -0800, mer### [at] stonehengecom (Randal L. Schwartz)
wrote:
>>>>>> "Stephen" == Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> writes:
>
>Stephen> Or I'm just amazed that they used the term, even
>
>I'm still a kid at heart.
Aren't we all kids at heart deep down :) Yea verily and as nemesis pointed out
Americans doth speake thus. ;-)
>And I was stumbling to insert words before the
>moment passed.
>
Forgiven
>I think it's because I had just seen "The Big Lebowski" on cable, where "dude"
>is said about 100 times, including the catchphrase "the dude, abides".
>
>I'm surprised you keep saying "they" when you're talking to me. :)
That is because I knew not that it was you. And yes I am a native English
speaker who sympathises with the French trying to eradicate Franglaise :)
I'm also a Radio 4 listener (BBC) and that should explain a lot :)
Again I'm sorry if I offended you I thought that it diminished David and Chris
and I'm a bit protective. I was also offended when Mr Bush was heard to greet Mr
Blair (not Prime Minister Blair, which is not what he is called) by Ho! Blair.
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I always watched Leo LaPorte on TechTV years ago. Took me some getting used to
at first. Kept thinking he was stepping indoors from a California beach every
time. ;) I think he must have had a frisbee made from a laser video disc
someplace. :D Liked that show, and the others. Erica Hill doing CNN now, very
sad when James Kim and family got lost in the mountains a while ago.
This was a fun listen, so my immense thanks for doing this interview and posting
about it here (whomever did, I'm replying to the end of the web view).
The topic of physical reality (of light) was only touched upon near the end.
That could have been interesting. Leo asked something about the possibility of
doing a spectrum in a prism after David and Chris left the talk.
There's a whole subject about recreating true characteristics of light and
reflection that was only hinted at. Most of the talk concerned artistic merits
of POV, or the coding changes; obvious why that was. :)
I'm in complete agreement about the awe-inspiring abilities people have to get
both programming and art together. It fascinates me whenever I see any of it,
new or old stuff. I think it's something overlooked in other CGI related
things. You can't really miss that point about POV-Ray.
Thank you again. I've been getting farther from the goings-on here in recent
years so this was great.
Bob Hughes
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>>>> "omniverse" == omniverse <omn### [at] charternet> writes:
omniverse> The topic of physical reality (of light) was only touched upon near
omniverse> the end. That could have been interesting. Leo asked something
omniverse> about the possibility of doing a spectrum in a prism after David
omniverse> and Chris left the talk.
That was me. I was wondering if you can get chromatic aberration
with POVRay, and Leo insisted that you could (without knowing),
and I regretted not asking while Chris and David were on the podcast.
So what is the answer? Can you make a Prism that works, breaking
white light into a rainbow?
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<mer### [at] stonehengecom> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: William Tracy
Subject: Re: FLOSS Weekly episode is now posted.
Date: 13 Feb 2008 02:00:23
Message: <47b29587@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> So what is the answer? Can you make a Prism that works, breaking
> white light into a rainbow?
http://www.povray.org/documentation/view/3.6.1/424/
:-)
--
William Tracy
afi### [at] gmailcom -- wtr### [at] calpolyedu
[Mars was] mineral; not animal, nor vegetable, nor viral. It could
have happened but it didn't. There was never any spontaneous generation
out of the clays or the sulphuric hot springs; no spore falling out of
space, no touch of a god; whatever starts life (for we do not know), it
did not happen on Mars. Mars rolled, proof of the otherness of the
world, of its stony vitality.
And then, one day...
-- Kim Stanley Robinson, _Red Mars_
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Actually, rereading that page, I think that's a picture with several
colored light sources, not an image with working chromatic aberration. :-/
But yes, Povray supports that.
--
William Tracy
afi### [at] gmailcom -- wtr### [at] calpolyedu
Running "beautifully fast" on modern hardware is somewhere between "I've
never been to jail" and "I shower daily" on the list of human
accomplishment.
-- phi### [at] philwelchnet, posting on Slashdot
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"William Tracy" <wtr### [at] calpolyedu> wrote in message
news:47b2983d$1@news.povray.org...
> Actually, rereading that page, I think that's a picture with several
> colored light sources, not an image with working chromatic aberration. :-/
>
> But yes, Povray supports that.
it's called chromatic dispersion in POV-Ray:
http://www.povray.org/documentation/view/3.6.1/415/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Wasn't it William Tracy who wrote:
>Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>> So what is the answer? Can you make a Prism that works, breaking
>> white light into a rainbow?
>
>http://www.povray.org/documentation/view/3.6.1/424/
There's two different effects, both called "dispersion" in POVRay.
There's the one that makes the pretty patterns in the shadows of sparkly
things (using photon mapping) and there's the one that causes the
"chromatic aberration" problem that plagues telescope makers.
I suppose that in the real world they're both caused by the same
fundamental physics, but in POVRay the settings for enabling the effect
in the forward mapping of photons is separate from the settings for
enabling the effect in the conventional tracing of rays.
I vaguely seem to remember that the documentation for DKBTrace claimed
that chromatic aberration was "a bug in the real world" and was
therefore not then supported.
--
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Zeger Knaepen" <zeg### [at] povplacecom> wrote in message
news:47b29ef9$1@news.povray.org...
>
> it's called chromatic dispersion in POV-Ray:
> http://www.povray.org/documentation/view/3.6.1/415/
Glad to see you guys answering this time of night-- well, almost 2 a.m.
local time for me-- maybe you're someplace with daylight...? LOL
That last paragraph of 2.6.1.5 Dispersion, before the section about
'caustics', will tell you this isn't about light being spread into actual
wavelengths. You use 'photons' to get the light transported onto other
surfaces or through air, otherwise this is only internal to transparent
objects that are also refractive (ior 1 for the refraction is ok).
One of my favorite things about POV-Ray, such light characteristics. Great
that it was thought of before the talk ended completely.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Mike Williams" <nos### [at] econymdemoncouk> wrote in message
news:3KI### [at] econymdemoncouk...
>
> I vaguely seem to remember that the documentation for DKBTrace claimed
> that chromatic aberration was "a bug in the real world" and was therefore
> not then supported.
Wow, that's thinking back a few years before I first used POV-Ray. :^D
Trying to remember if a mirror, or any opaque reflective object, can also do
this when the light shines onto something next to it (ior added, of course).
I haven't been doing much with POV past couple years far as creative renders
go. I'd probably know for certain if I had been doing more things with it.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Williams wrote:
> Wasn't it William Tracy who wrote:
> I vaguely seem to remember that the documentation for DKBTrace claimed
> that chromatic aberration was "a bug in the real world" and was
> therefore not then supported.
>
That's a cute comment but I don't recall saying it in the documentation
and a quick scan of the documentation for DKBTrace seems to show no
trace of it.
David Buck
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>>>> "Bob" == Bob Hughes <omn### [at] charternet> writes:
Bob> One of my favorite things about POV-Ray, such light characteristics. Great
Bob> that it was thought of before the talk ended completely.
So Leo was right! Cool. I kept thinking "That's hard to program so
it probably doesn't do it". :) Darn programmer in me.
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<mer### [at] stonehengecom> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>>>>> "Bob" == Bob Hughes <omn### [at] charternet> writes:
>
> Bob> One of my favorite things about POV-Ray, such light characteristics. Great
> Bob> that it was thought of before the talk ended completely.
>
> So Leo was right! Cool. I kept thinking "That's hard to program so
> it probably doesn't do it". :) Darn programmer in me.
>
It wasn't in DKBTrace and early versions of POVRay. Since raytracing
traces light rays backwards from the eye towards the world, when the
light goes through a prism, you'd have to split one ray into lots of
other rays with different colors. This seems to be what the POVRay
dispersion feature does.
The other complication (which POVRay tries to fake) is that the rays in
a raytracer only track three colors - red, green and blue. In the real
world, light is (generally) a blend of lots of different wavelengths.
To get truly accurate results, we should model the light as a bundle of
wavelengths. Each surface will reflect some wavelengths, absorb others,
and scatter others. When we calculate the final wavelength bundle for a
pixel, we can then map it onto RGB. POVRay cheats by only assuming that
the light only contains 3 wavelengths.
David Buck
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> So Leo was right! Cool. I kept thinking "That's hard to program so
> it probably doesn't do it". :) Darn programmer in me.
I find it interesting that Povray does all sorts of conceptually
difficult things (dispersion, volumetric media) but doesn't do many
conceptually simple things (luminous bloom comes to mind).
(Actually, my impression is that there are some architectural
difficulties involved with adding luminous bloom, but Warp and others
hope to resolve that in Povray 4.)
--
William Tracy
afi### [at] gmailcom -- wtr### [at] calpolyedu
"'The Force'?"
"The Force is an energy field--"
"Energy? But energy is force times distance."
"And 'power of the force' would be distance times the derivative
with respect to time."
-- Darths and Droids
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
William Tracy <wtr### [at] calpolyedu> wrote:
> (Actually, my impression is that there are some architectural
> difficulties involved with adding luminous bloom, but Warp and others
> hope to resolve that in Povray 4.)
"luminous bloom" and glare are caustics happening inside the eye and other
camera obscura devices. Unless povray simulates what happens inside, it won't
happen and is probably better left as a postprocess effect.
But there are SDL scripts for both "luminous bloom" and glare in povray. The
former as a postprocess using povray itself and the latter using povray disc
objects...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Buck <dav### [at] simberoncom> wrote:
> The FLOSS Weekly episode on POV-Ray has now been posted.
>
> http://twit.tv/floss24
>
> Enjoy.
>
> David Buck
Listening to floss-24 here. " ... programmer or artist ..." ?
We hear admission for lack of creativity or artistic talent, different words but
much the same.
I got something that can help.
I wrote about it earlier. People are mainly right or left brained people,
logical or creative. What that means is that one hemisphere of the brain is
used more than the other side.
Tuning is possible to get that other side up to speed. But I know you guys are
not interested. Or are you?
aQ
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>>>>> "Stephen" == Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> writes:
>
> Stephen> I enjoyed the broadcast but what a pair of bankers the hosts are.
>
> Stephen> What is a senior dude FFS?
>
> Tell me what a "banker" is, and I'll tell you what a "senior dude" is.
>
I'm a banker. I handle the vault at our branch.
--
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
(follow-ups set to o-t)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"alphaQuad" <alp### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in message
news:web.47b3474786589f5e73c5f880@news.povray.org...
> David Buck <dav### [at] simberoncom> wrote:
>> The FLOSS Weekly episode on POV-Ray has now been posted.
>>
>> http://twit.tv/floss24
>>
>> Enjoy.
>>
>> David Buck
>
> Listening to floss-24 here. " ... programmer or artist ..." ?
>
> We hear admission for lack of creativity or artistic talent, different
> words but
> much the same.
>
> I got something that can help.
>
> I wrote about it earlier. People are mainly right or left brained people,
> logical or creative. What that means is that one hemisphere of the brain
> is
> used more than the other side.
>
> Tuning is possible to get that other side up to speed. But I know you guys
> are
> not interested. Or are you?
>
> aQ
>
Using both sides is fun! =;oD
--
-Nekar Xenos-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
