 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Does anyone know why POV-Ray is not represented at
http://www.renderosity.com ?
It seems almost every ray tracing and modelling software has a section
except POV-Ray.
Cheers
Eddie
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
POVeddie wrote:
>
> Does anyone know why POV-Ray is not represented at
> http://www.renderosity.com ?
>
> It seems almost every ray tracing and modelling software has a section
> except POV-Ray.
It is a conspiracy!
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
There is a simple explanation: not enough
artists submit POV-Ray work. And I think
the main point is that lots of techniques and
ideas apply to 3D-Studio Max, Maya,
Lightwave and whatnot, but POV-Ray (when
you attempt to do everything internally) requires
totally different techniques.
After all, that's what these newsgroups are for.
No one except a complete newbie will tell you
to use raytracing for better shadows... ;-)
--
Tim Nikias v2.0
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights
Email: tim.nikias (@) gmx.de
> Does anyone know why POV-Ray is not represented at
> http://www.renderosity.com ?
>
> It seems almost every ray tracing and modelling software has a section
> except POV-Ray.
>
> Cheers
> Eddie
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.515 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 01.09.2003
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
POVeddie wrote:
> It seems almost every ray tracing and modelling software has a section
> except POV-Ray.
Try 'other apps'. :P I think there's a few there.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook wrote:
>Try 'other apps'. :P I think there's a few there.
That's precisely my point. When POV-Ray artists post their works there, they
can't proudly select "POV-Ray" from the list of software used. :(
It's a great place for people to put up a gallery of their work if they
don't have a website, or have disk space limits.
I suspect there aren't many POV-Ray users there because not many of us are
even aware the place exists! I only discovered it a few days ago.
I agree this news server is a better place for POV-Ray community
discussions, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have a POV-Ray area at
Renderosity for POV-Ray related stuff.
Cheers
Eddie
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
news:web.3f59f68cc4c19da9e70293d30@news.povray.org...
> It seems almost every ray tracing and modelling software has a section
> except POV-Ray.
Renderosity started as a Poser site and since the Poser gallery, forum and
store are still by far the most populated areas they tend to attract the
most posters and viewers. For that reason the few images I've posted there
and that contained Poser models are in the Poser gallery rather than in the
"Other apps".
3D community websites (apart those dedicated to POV-Ray and the IRTC) rarely
carry POV-Ray images anyway.
G.
--
**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray and Poser computer images
- Posters
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And why is that? I guess, the main part is this:
IF you have the money for more popular programs,
you get easy access to more diverse capabilities
and faster processing of images (as the popular
programs use 3D-Acceleration Hardware, which
POV-Ray can't use). Thus, you can spit more
images in shorter time, and thus, the production
phase isn't as long as with POV-Ray (just think
about Radiosity and Photons, focal blur, especially
fine-tuning those). I might be wrong about the
production phase being shorter, but that would be
due to more capabalities, better modelling control
than via script etc.
Lets face it, POV-Ray is neat and free, its the
best image-processing "engine" I've seen so far, but
it has some drawbacks (e.g. scripting interface) which
just can't compete with popular programs.
Aside of all that, I always wonder how many people
posting their stuff actually *own* the programs, rather
than just "use" them... Can't happen with POV-Ray! :-)
Regards,
Tim
--
Tim Nikias v2.0
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights
Email: tim.nikias (@) gmx.de
>
> > It seems almost every ray tracing and modelling software has a section
> > except POV-Ray.
>
> Renderosity started as a Poser site and since the Poser gallery, forum and
> store are still by far the most populated areas they tend to attract the
> most posters and viewers. For that reason the few images I've posted there
> and that contained Poser models are in the Poser gallery rather than in
the
> "Other apps".
>
> 3D community websites (apart those dedicated to POV-Ray and the IRTC)
rarely
> carry POV-Ray images anyway.
>
> G.
>
> --
> **********************
> http://www.oyonale.com
> **********************
> - Graphic experiments
> - POV-Ray and Poser computer images
> - Posters
>
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.515 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 01.09.2003
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hy Tim!
> Lets face it, POV-Ray is neat and free, its the
> best image-processing "engine" I've seen so far, but
> it has some drawbacks (e.g. scripting interface) which
> just can't compete with popular programs.
IMHO the scripting interface is the one thing which makes POV-Ray way
better than all those other modellers :)
Florian
--
//=================[web: http://www.torfbold.com]==================\\
#local a=-5;#while(a<5)sphere{<sin(a*pi)*5a*10pow(a,5)*.01>sin(a*a*a*
.1)+1pigment{rgb 9*z}}#local a=a+.01;#end camera{look_at-y*10location
<8,-3,-8>*10}// [www.povray.org] [www.imp.org] [www.irtc.org]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It depends. On one hand, its very easy to understand
(at least IMHO) and once you've grasped the concept,
understanding the script of someone else isn't that
complicated either.
Still, modelling in script is a pain. I like it, its fun,
but popular modelling demands something else...
On the other hand, the scripting of POV is pretty
powerful, but I can't really judge on that, as I haven't
got any commercial renderer at hand.
--
Tim Nikias v2.0
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights
Email: tim.nikias (@) gmx.de
> Hy Tim!
> > Lets face it, POV-Ray is neat and free, its the
> > best image-processing "engine" I've seen so far, but
> > it has some drawbacks (e.g. scripting interface) which
> > just can't compete with popular programs.
> IMHO the scripting interface is the one thing which makes POV-Ray way
> better than all those other modellers :)
>
> Florian
> --
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.515 / Virus Database: 313 - Release Date: 01.09.2003
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3f5a1e45@news.povray.org>, git### [at] wanadoo fr says...
> Renderosity started as a Poser site and since the Poser gallery, forum and
> store are still by far the most populated areas...
Imho, this is a slightly questionable 'standard' by which they chose to
categorize things anyway. Poser can't create the original meshes it
manipulates, it is practically worthless for producing the final product,
requiring that instead the model be exported and used in something else,
etc. Yes, it is nice to know which images used poser, but the real work
gets done in most case within some other piece of software. It should be
at the very least, cross indexed to the actually engine used to produce
the final result. And of course if you happen to use an engine that isn't
one of those listed (and some of them are, or at least I have never seen
them used to produce anything except, absolute junk).
I have to say that it bugs me as well that POV-Ray isn't listed as an
option, but stuff like Amorphium are given their own category. Has anyone
ever produced something with that which doesn't look like bloody
claymation? lol Or maybe that is the only thing it is supposed to be used
for...
--
void main () {
call functional_code()
else
call crash_windows();
}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
