 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi,
I have some random spots (white) appearing on my rendering (of IFJ logo -
see pbi).
This is for example this white spot is top-left "corner" of sphere above
letter "i" just above one of electrons (yellow sphere). This bug has only
about 1..2 pixels and is white.
Interesting - this spot is beeing in different position in each render
(with same source !) so it is some kind of memory-leek or uninitialized
variable (btw You dont use tools like Electric Fance to debug?).
I had simillar problem in other part of pictures. This is created by:
torus { // (or sphere)
pigment { rgbf }
interia{media {
emission 50 // or other bright color
//maybe some density but not needed
}
hollow
}
and in addition I noticed then if a media-container intersects with nearby
geometry, then geometry is lighten several times stronger if the media was
very, very close to surface (but not tuching them).
I will try to find a minimalistic scene and post a bug report to
.bugreports.
It seems like Linux version dont have that problem..... I would test if Pov
3.6 for linux do have it but.... someone desided that it's time for
expiration, so - test it Yourself now, sinc I do not want to mess with
entire system clock for such a reason, sorry.
Above bug exists in pov 3.6 beta (with Im able to test with little help of
hacking ;)
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
spa### [at] raf256 com news:Xns94C560E9071CCraf256com@203.29.75.35
Btw, the image looks quite different in pov 3.5-linux then 3.6-windows :-/
radiosity is darker... where defautl values for radiosity (i.e. brightness)
or some global_settings changed in 3.5 -> 3.6 ?
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8 Apr 2004 03:31:42 -0400, "Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256com> wrote:
> Interesting - this spot is beeing in different position in each render
> (with same source !) so it is some kind of memory-leek or uninitialized
> variable
Would you like to be a little more precise about version you are talking
about? Later you are saying that you couldn't use 3.6 beta and at the same
paragraph you say you used something different than 3.6 so... is this report
about 3.6 beta (nth), 3.5 or 3.1? I suppose 3.6 too and since only this
version can be fixed then follow-up set.
> (btw You dont use tools like Electric Fance to debug?).
What you mean ? http://www.google.com/search?q=Electric+Fance+debug isn't very
helpful. I'm sure being experienced programmer you already know there are
plenty of debugging tools for different platfroms including memory guards in
POV-Ray itself.
> It seems like Linux version dont have that problem..... I would test if Pov
> 3.6 for linux do have it but.... someone desided that it's time for
> expiration
What you mean ? Current expiration time was set to middle of april IIRC.
> Above bug exists in pov 3.6 beta (with Im able to test with little help of
> hacking ;)
What hacking do you mean ?
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8 Apr 2004 03:35:48 -0400, "Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256com> wrote:
> Btw, the image looks quite different in pov 3.5-linux then 3.6-windows :-/
> radiosity is darker...
http://www.povray.org/beta/ :
What's changed since v3.5 release :
Core code :
* unclipped radiosity values
> some global_settings changed in 3.5 -> 3.6
Rafal, this is another case when you are talking about 3.6 here so... is it
really so difficoult to you to discuss issues related to development of 3.6 in
povray.beta-test? How do you want to be not disregarded with your features
requests and complains if you ignore so simple requests like using beta-test
group in relation to beta version of application? I personally would
appreciate a little more segregation of information on your side. Thanks in
advance,
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
abx### [at] abxartpl news:vb1a70dvm1lrnposvdskirffj11ubfrhl5@4ax.com
> requests and complains if you ignore so simple requests like using
> beta-test group in relation to beta version of application? I
> personally would appreciate a little more segregation of information
> on your side. Thanks in advance,
Ok, sorry.
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rafal 'Raf256' Maj wrote:
> abx### [at] abxartpl news:vb1a70dvm1lrnposvdskirffj11ubfrhl5@4ax.com
>
>
>>requests and complains if you ignore so simple requests like using
>>beta-test group in relation to beta version of application? I
>>personally would appreciate a little more segregation of information
>>on your side. Thanks in advance,
>
>
> Ok, sorry.
And never forget to mention which beta you are talking about and on
which platform. There is no "Pov-Ray 3.6 beta", but "Pov-Ray 3.6 for
Windows beta 1", ...beta 2 etc. And actually you should allways be
talking only about the latest beta - in this case you don't seem to be
aware of the beta 3 and you are still using some older beta. Bug reports
of expired betas only cause harm to developers as you probably now
notice. Had you not "hacked" it/system time you would not be reporting
bugs of old versions. I'm very glad the executables _do_ expire...
It should also be mentioned which Windows you are using: 3.1, 95, 98,
2000, XP. I also think that bug reports of beta versions should be
posted to .beta-test, not to .bugreports which is moderated (or here).
Severi S.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <Xns94C560E9071CCraf256com@203.29.75.35>,
"Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256com> wrote:
> Interesting - this spot is beeing in different position in each render
> (with same source !) so it is some kind of memory-leek or uninitialized
> variable (btw You dont use tools like Electric Fance to debug?).
A memory leak occurs when memory is allocated but never released. The
only result is that the program uses more memory than it should...if it
leaks enough memory, it can use up all that is available. It will not
cause any difference in the resulting image.
Electric Fence provides "guard pages", areas of memory before and after
allocations that account for buffer overruns or underruns. This kind of
error could cause rendering problems, but is more likely to crash.
Electric Fence does not check for using uninitialized variables or stale
pointers, and a quick look at the POV-Ray source code will reveal that
it already includes facilities for debugging memory problems, including
leaks, double frees, and so on.
--
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: <chr### [at] tagpovrayorg>
http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
