 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi again,
after discussion about my commercial 2D cad program (with additional 3d
render and a pov-ray output support) I found it to be an interesting
subject and perhaps it can be analyzed further.
First of all - povray OUTPUT (not povray program itself). License say that
one can whatever he wants with it (all images are property of scene file
creator). Is PovRAY team/users/creators - rather heapy that it can be used
in serious and/or commercial projects?
For example projects like zazzle is totaly based on PovRAY (and other
rendereres).
Second - programs that ARE 3d renderers that need povray and that exist
almost only for PovRay. There are free projects like TomTree / PovTree.
But also - there is Moray, with is a commercial program with PovRay as
essentional part.
In fact, Moray also is not distributed along with PovRAY, so I guess they
had faced same problem as I did, and where forced to same solution (so we
will just tell them to download it manualy)?
Why not let commercial usage also of PovRAY, for example some payment like
10% of software price could be donated for PovRay - servers, software
development, maybe buing professional 3D models or HDRI, etc etc.
Even without such peyment - free (more or less) software grows rapidly.
For example - I was hoping that perhaps I will have chance to make a 3d
editor my self some day. If my 2d house-planning software would be more
closely integrated to PovRAY (it will be quite close anyway, in the 3D
visualization part, but such small problems like not putting Pov on same CD
can result in more or less decrease of product remunerate and/or my
position in job with leads to lover budget with this project related in
some way to povray).
Even with disinclination from PovRAY team to use PovRAY as only 3d
renderer, I will try to concentrate on it (assuming my client woulndt
change mind like "stop playing with that and get a real 3d visualization
C++ library") hoping it will be both more comfortable for me and profitable
POV project (pov marketing).
But I still dont fully understand philosophy of PovRay software. Other
projects like Blender create software fundation, get lots of money from UE
(AFAIK) and therefore can develope much quicker also greate software.
Is blocking usage of PovRay renderer a good thing to do?
AFAIK there are some legal problems, if we would perhaps will someday to
change pov license to gave it better chances to expand and be known and
usefull software - like Apache, Linux, GCC - none of them would say "it can
be used ONLY for fun, we just dont dont let anyone make a serious
(commercial) project using it". That problem was about parts of old code
with authors can not be contacted now and asked if they are willing to
allow such ose of their code.
Why not try to rewrite this sections (improving them by the way, using
gained experience)?
If my project will succeed I will have a bit more time for PovRAY (despite
license problems with realy caused me some trouble, but ofcourse that is
NOT nobody fault, I choose ot use PovRAY in opposite to my client's
opinion).
I think I would like to help with rewritting such code - if it would lead
to cleryfie license problems.
I do have small experience in 3d renderers coding (I did write some small
part of one renderer recently) and quite big C/C++ experience (I hope to
present beta version of my 2d CAD application in off-topic group in about
one month).
I think we have some talented programmers here, connected with 3D software,
and realy working togeather can bring better profits for everyone :)
--
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:Xns954238A8D4818raf256com@203.29.75.35
> For example - I was hoping that perhaps I will have chance to make a
> 3d editor my self some day. If my 2d house-planning software would be
> more closely integrated to PovRAY
...then perhaps I can make a small version of program like some PovHouse
that will be freeware (and will promote both my full program and PovRay)
and with ofcourse could be used by PovRay users with their own objects to
more comfortable create a nice house (something like PovTree for trees and
TerrainGenerator for heightfields).
> But I still dont fully understand philosophy of PovRay software. Other
> projects like Blender create software fundation, get lots of money
> from UE (AFAIK) and therefore can develope much quicker also greate
> software.
...ofcourse that was just one of examples (UE funding of interesting
free/educational programs), most open source and totaly free software gets
money for it development anyway.
I was so heapy about possibility of promoting both my program and PovRay -
for example online shop with this CAD program, and IRTC CD's (as a link to
povray.org), and CD with PovRAY + libraries (or almost free, just the costs
of recording it, or a bit more expensive so that there would be money for
povray.org - as PovTeam wishes), perhaps few nice zazzle images would be
created by the way, I will create a big object/furniture library (doors,
windows, lamps, tables, chairs, etc etc) and I was hoping to make a part of
it free and donate it to PovRAY.
> Is blocking usage of PovRay renderer a good thing to do?
...I will try to still make all thoes things, perhaps manual download of
PovRAY will not be so bad for out customers relationship...
In addition - I was told to make *first* an OpenGL renderer, so that PovRAY
will not be important... but why - if I would be making for OpenGL, then I
would use meshes instead of .pov files, so there would be no furniture.inc
library beause I don't have time to create each object in 3 versions - 3D
.pov, 3D mesh, and 2d shape icon.
In fact I was hoping a little for more optymistics aproach (yeah, PovRay
will be sell in shops as plugin to "normal" non-for-geeks-only program ;-)
and I was anyway going to make it as profitable for povray as possible
(logo in program and on program box, link to www, link to IRTC, povray as
standalone application that will be installed in same time and user will be
motivated to try it out, like "Did YOu Know... that out CAD Program uses a
fantastic 3d rendere, that is totaly free, for raytracing the final version
of project - run Start->PovRay 3.6 to try it now!").
In addition of some for-dummies manuls (i.e. links to some freeware 3d
wireframe pov editors, and perhaps to Moray, and *easy* instruction how to
use it all) - could result in perhaps hundrets (thousends maybe?) new users
from Poland to begin with, and later we hope to sell application also in UE
(perhaps USA some day?).
Also making some small/free version would be possible as I written before.
I dont know - maybe I'm too optymistics... I didn't hope that everyone will
help/congratulate/etc. me about possible one of most serious projects in
with PovRAY could be made important part, but I was hoping atleast to not
find such problems, sice I didn't have it with other free tools I use to
create my application.
But I hope to find a good solution, and perhaps this discussion can result
in help for others from this group that wish to use PovRAY is serious tasks
in future.
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
in news:Xns954238A8D4818raf256com@203.29.75.35 Rafal 'Raf256' Maj wrote:
> [...]
> Is blocking usage of PovRay renderer a good thing to do?
> [...]
Rafal,
If I were you, I wouldn't 'waste' any more words on this. The licence
is as it is. We all have to live with it as it is. It won't change
tomorrow and it has a long history.
Anyway, you did the right thing, contacted the team and asked their
permission. You didn't get the awnser you hoped for, so be it. Others
probably do it differently, they steal the code and use it anyway. What
do you prefer, To still be able to output POV-SDL from your application
to render with POV-Ray, or being a thief?
Use your energie to write your application, not on "what could have been
if ..."
Ingo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10 Aug 2004 23:31:40 -0400, "Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256com> wrote:
> First of all - povray OUTPUT (not povray program itself). License say that
> one can whatever he wants with it (all images are property of scene file
> creator). Is PovRAY team/users/creators - rather heapy that it can be used
> in serious and/or commercial projects?
Sorry I'm lost what you are trying to say above.
> For example projects like zazzle is totaly based on PovRAY (and other
> rendereres).
Do you know somebody from there and have stats ?
Did you made a simple browsing ? "Wild animals" category. "Travel".
"Astronomy, space." ?
> Second - programs that ARE 3d renderers that need povray and that exist
> almost only for PovRay. There are free projects like TomTree / PovTree.
I'm lost - it's example of what ?
> But also - there is Moray, with is a commercial program with PovRay as
> essentional part.
>
> In fact, Moray also is not distributed along with PovRAY, so I guess they
> had faced same problem as I did, and where forced to same solution (so we
> will just tell them to download it manualy)?
Hint: search for "Moray" in list of POV-Team members in manual.
> Even without such peyment - free (more or less) software grows rapidly.
My observation is exactly opposite: I saw larger frequency of announcement of
good patches/include files/additional tools in the past.
> "stop playing with that and get a real 3d visualization
> C++ library"
What's name of this library ?
> Is blocking usage of PovRay renderer a good thing to do?
Nobody is blocking anything. So many programs have export to POV script - how
is it blocking? Open Office does export to MS Word but it does not need to
distribute MS Word itself.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Btw, since you are probably going to use the name of the program in
more or less official contexts, the official name is POV-Ray. You should
probably use that instead of the many variations you use in these articles.
--
#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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
war### [at] tagpovrayorg news:4119d00a@news.povray.org
> Btw, since you are probably going
The probably thing now is - that I'm going to search for a new job, since
"No! All parts of application MUST be on CD - thats what distributor
wants".
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2004 06:59:45 -0400, "Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256com> wrote:
> The probably thing now is - that I'm going to search for a new job, since
> "No! All parts of application MUST be on CD - thats what distributor
> wants".
You could avoid it if you would not think about POV-Ray like free drawing
library, IMHO. In view of your past posts I think your thinking about nature,
ownership and developers is somewhere incomplete. Just drop idea of POV and
stay with OpenGL. POV-Ray has no problems with meshes.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
abx### [at] abxartpl news:7t0kh01u9n0vhnifgfppomj8a3lugdqs71@4ax.com
> You could avoid it if you would not think about POV-Ray like free
> drawing library, IMHO.
I am using it as free drawing library, to create GUI for application for
example - something wrong with that? I thought that is one of purposes of
Pov-RAY, other are using it for creating games graphics etc, etc...
> In view of your past posts I think your thinking about nature,
> ownership and developers is somewhere incomplete.
?
> Just drop idea of POV and stay with OpenGL.
Radiosity, reflections, (area)shadows, CSG+transforms(only last one is
easy to write self)
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2004 07:55:13 -0400, Rafal 'Raf256' Maj wrote:
> I am using it as free drawing library, to create GUI for application for
> example - something wrong with that? I thought that is one of purposes of
> Pov-RAY, other are using it for creating games graphics etc, etc...
Using it to create graphics which are to be used in commercial projects is
one thing, using it as (quite significant) part of your commercial software
is another thing.
This is clearly stated in POV-Ray's End-user License:
"... the User is permitted to use the Software in a profit-making
enterprise, provided such profit arises primarily from use of the Software
and not from distribution of the Software or a work including the Software
in whole or part."
--
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2004 07:55:13 -0400, "Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256com> wrote:
> abx### [at] abxartpl news:7t0kh01u9n0vhnifgfppomj8a3lugdqs71@4ax.com
> > You could avoid it if you would not think about POV-Ray like free
> > drawing library, IMHO.
>
> I am using it as free drawing library, to create GUI for application for
> example
Then you are not using it as a library, but as a development tool. To the
end-user it's invisible.
> I thought that is one of purposes of
> Pov-RAY, other are using it for creating games graphics etc, etc...
Again, creation of graphic is part of development of game.
> > In view of your past posts I think your thinking about nature,
> > ownership and developers is somewhere incomplete.
(I forgot to add "of POV-Ray" somewhere in the sentence.)
> ?
Hard to explain. It's something which caused others to less frequently answer
to your posts.
> > Just drop idea of POV and stay with OpenGL.
>
> Radiosity, reflections, (area)shadows, CSG+transforms(only last one is
> easy to write self)
Well, those are not features for fast preview in CAD program.
Note that even Moray switched to OpenGL preview and there is one for POV-Ray
itself somewhere too.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
