Not a competition, just to see what people can come up with each month to post
in the binaries section.

Post a reply to this message

On 4-5-2017 2:58, jhu wrote:
> Not a competition, just to see what people can come up with each month to post
> in the binaries section.
>
>

Why not indeed? I am in favour.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 5/4/2017 7:53 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 4-5-2017 2:58, jhu wrote:
>> Not a competition, just to see what people can come up with each month
>> to post
>> in the binaries section.
>>
>>
>
> Why not indeed? I am in favour.
>

What, with your experience of TC-TRC?

That aside it would be good if it took off. Maybe having no subject but 
a deadline would be the way to go.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 4-5-2017 9:54, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/4/2017 7:53 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 4-5-2017 2:58, jhu wrote:
>>> Not a competition, just to see what people can come up with each month
>>> to post
>>> in the binaries section.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Why not indeed? I am in favour.
>>
>
> What, with your experience of TC-TRC?

I am not expected to monitor this, am I? :-)
Then I can sit back and watch the show...

>
> That aside it would be good if it took off. Maybe having no subject but
> a deadline would be the way to go.

To be sure, I am a bit sceptical about the success of such a 
theme-of-the-month thing, as you say, considering the experience with 
TC-RTC.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:

> To be sure, I am a bit sceptical about the success of such a
> theme-of-the-month thing, as you say, considering the experience with
> TC-RTC.

True - I'd say there are a lot of contributing factors there.

1. POV-Ray doesn't really have an advertising department, so the people who know
about it are few to begin with, and it's a specialized group.  It's not a
passive and mindless activity.
2. POV-Ray has that whole steep learning curve.
3. Constructing a scene can be difficult and time consuming.  It takes practice
to know what you need to make _beforehand_ and then there's the process of
working out the placement, geometry, textures, lighting, etc.  A modeler can
help, but it's still a slow iterative process, full of debugging SDL, etc.
4. People are squeezed for time, and working out a scene takes long stretches of
uninterrupted time.  There are many times when this can be an increasingly rare
luxury.

I'd say the idea is still sound, and good - but I'd use the monthly topic as a
launching point for addressing the above obstacles.

Advertise.
There have been a lot of good people doing a LOT of good work over the years to
make POV-Ray better, more usable, and writing their own tools to make it faster
and easier to make scenes.  Keep up the good work.
There also needs to be a clear reason why people would want to use POV-Ray over
Grasshopper, Maya, Blender, and all of those other packages....


Just throwing some thoughts out there.

Post a reply to this message

On 4-5-2017 14:05, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>
>> To be sure, I am a bit sceptical about the success of such a
>> theme-of-the-month thing, as you say, considering the experience with
>> TC-RTC.
>
> True - I'd say there are a lot of contributing factors there.
>
> 1. POV-Ray doesn't really have an advertising department, so the people who know
> about it are few to begin with, and it's a specialized group.  It's not a
> passive and mindless activity.
> 2. POV-Ray has that whole steep learning curve.
> 3. Constructing a scene can be difficult and time consuming.  It takes practice
> to know what you need to make _beforehand_ and then there's the process of
> working out the placement, geometry, textures, lighting, etc.  A modeler can
> help, but it's still a slow iterative process, full of debugging SDL, etc.
> 4. People are squeezed for time, and working out a scene takes long stretches of
> uninterrupted time.  There are many times when this can be an increasingly rare
> luxury.
>
> I'd say the idea is still sound, and good - but I'd use the monthly topic as a
> launching point for addressing the above obstacles.
>
> Advertise.
> There have been a lot of good people doing a LOT of good work over the years to
> make POV-Ray better, more usable, and writing their own tools to make it faster
> and easier to make scenes.  Keep up the good work.
> There also needs to be a clear reason why people would want to use POV-Ray over
> Grasshopper, Maya, Blender, and all of those other packages....
>
>
> Just throwing some thoughts out there.
>

Your four numbered points are spot on indeed (they may even be valid for 
other renderers too). I certainly would like to see more images here but 
I am aware of the difficulties. I am plodding on myself :-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:

> Your four numbered points are spot on indeed (they may even be valid for
> other renderers too). I certainly would like to see more images here but
> I am aware of the difficulties. I am plodding on myself :-)
>
> --
> Thomas

I'm doing my part. Also, need more animations

Post a reply to this message

On 5/5/2017 3:42 PM, jhu wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>
>> Your four numbered points are spot on indeed (they may even be valid for
>> other renderers too). I certainly would like to see more images here but
>> I am aware of the difficulties. I am plodding on myself :-)
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
> I'm doing my part. Also, need more animations
>

You are a hard task master. An animation in a month?


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 5/5/2017 3:42 PM, jhu wrote:
> > Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> >
> >> Your four numbered points are spot on indeed (they may even be valid for
> >> other renderers too). I certainly would like to see more images here but
> >> I am aware of the difficulties. I am plodding on myself :-)
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thomas
> >
> > I'm doing my part. Also, need more animations
> >
>
> You are a hard task master. An animation in a month?
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
>      Stephen

It's easy. Just simulate something in Blender and render with Povray. I'll whip
up something when I get home.

Post a reply to this message

On 5/5/2017 6:58 PM, jhu wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>> On 5/5/2017 3:42 PM, jhu wrote:
>>> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Your four numbered points are spot on indeed (they may even be valid for
>>>> other renderers too). I certainly would like to see more images here but
>>>> I am aware of the difficulties. I am plodding on myself :-)
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Thomas
>>>
>>> I'm doing my part. Also, need more animations
>>>
>>
>> You are a hard task master. An animation in a month?
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards
>>       Stephen
>
> It's easy. Just simulate something in Blender and render with Povray. I'll whip
> up something when I get home.
>
>

What do you think I have been doing for the past month and a half. :-P
Now I am trying to get the Blender PovRay exporter to get it right.

I'll post the link again in case you missed it

https://youtu.be/7yAYTllKCic



-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message