New user, yes but ... here I am imitating nature and I do a
pearl, which is 20 concentric spheres and nine different colors
on a table turns out just fine with the defaults. Rather nice if
I say so myself. Each sphere is both reflective and transparent.
(Note 20 here, plus a two layered reflective/transparent table
also.) 

	So I go to test the ADC function and set max_trace_level to 200,
cut it down to one pearl, put the rendering area to just the
pearl and the reflection. 40 hours later this Pentium Pro 333
machine has just gotten passed the half way point and I lose
interest but it does look better. I was warned. 

	So here is the problem. I out of my first serious scene which
was just two nested glass boxes with a modestly complex purely
reflective object inside and I set the MTR to 200 and it crashes
almost as soon as it gets into the box reflections. OK so I set
it at 20 and it crashes again a little further into the
reflective/transparent boxes but not much further. (Note two
surfaces here plus the reflective object.)

	It does fully render at 7. 

	Now I was warned about a stack overflow possibility. But I have
a huge numbeer more in the one that did not crash than in the one
that does crash? 

	OK, what is going on here? Can anyone interperate the error
message?

Post a reply to this message

Matt Giuer <jul### [at] ijnet> wrote:
: 	Now I was warned about a stack overflow possibility. But I have
: a huge numbeer more in the one that did not crash than in the one
: that does crash? 

  AFAIK the 'stack overflow problem' explanation is only a good guess. So far
I have not seen any confirmation of this from the povteam. It certainly
looks like a stack overflow problem, but I wouldn't say it really is the
right one. It could be another type of bug which looks like a stack overflow
problem.
  If it really is a stack problem, then it's a strange one, since it seems
to depend on the type of objects in the scene. Well, who knows? Perhaps
povray handles different objects (and pigments) in different ways so that
the problem arises only with a specific combination of them. I don't know.

-- 
main(i){char*_="BdsyFBThhHFBThhHFRz]NFTITQF|DJIFHQhhF";while(i=
*_++)for(;i>1;printf("%s",i-70?i&1?"[]":" ":(i=0,"\n")),i/=2);} /*- Warp. -*/

Post a reply to this message