Oh, hey, don't think I said anything about single frame rendering to get a still
image out of a animation did I?  Since I probably didn't and you might not know,
you'll need a Subset_Start_Frame=123 Subset_End_Frame=123 pair of lines in a Ini
file just like you were doing animation but to get a single frame instead.
+SF and +EF is the same on the command-line.
Fact is that with the spray.inc it has to use the clock directly, you can't
define clock as something else and expect it to be seen.  Same goes for many
such includes.  And the spray needs to get going in order to be fully present in
the scene so you'd want to move ahead into the sequence of frames quite a bit.

example Ini:

Initial_Frame=0
Final_Frame=89
Subset_Start_Frame=29
Subset_End_Frame=29
Initial_Clock=0
Final_Clock=1
Cyclic_Animation=On

Good luck with it, fun and frustration is always the way.  Keep asking
questions.

Bob

"The "D"" <the### [at] netzeronet> wrote in message
news:3893ce0a@news.povray.org...

Bob Hughes <omn### [at] hotmailcom?subject=PoV-News:> wrote in message
news:388fdaed@news.povray.org...
> Yes, animated, although that makes little difference if you set it up like an
> animation and use a mid range clock value for instance to do the still image.
> The stream flow thing was simply a spray directed along the ground plane.  I
was
> thinking it could also fall from a height onto the ground with little or no
> bounce to pool up in a basin.  The main problem being to keep it around long
> enough (the lifetime and evaporation parameters) since the particles have a
> tendency to shrink away regardless of the settings from what I could tell
about
> it.
> It should be possible for a limited puddling anyhow just using the spray alone
> and no separate puddle object.

Ok so It doesn't matter for animation or stills the settings would come out to
be about the same then. Gotcha



> Not sure I gather your reasoning about the torus or cylinder with a hole for
> standing water, unless you meant for the containing object.  That would need
> some CSG used on the spray.  I usually go with either plane, clipped plane,
box,
> blob, disc or cylinder as water surfaces with a wrinkles pattern or highly
> turbulent ripples (waves if active water).  Others have used 'height_field'
too,
> in various ways.

The reasoning might not make sense becasue of my lack of indepth knowledge of
the laws of POV. What I was thinking was since the bowlish part of the fountain
(the only part I have finisht at the time) looks like the bottom half of a
shpere with an upside down hollow cone in the middle I would need some way to
get the water around the cone but I'm now seeing that that doesn't make much
sense since the water will be tranparent (or translucent I haven't decided)
anyway.

Post a reply to this message

Clipping on a primitive should be fine, so long as you get inside/outside
correct for the surface you will use for the 'interior'.  I can't recollect
putting media inside of a partial object so I couldn't say it will definitely be
okay; be sure 'hollow' is in the object.
  'interior' for the refraction ('ior') and a 'fade_distance' might be all you'd
need.  Translucence isn't available yet in MegaPOV or Official POV-Ray
(obviously), but 'fade_color' is.

Bob

"The "D"" <the### [at] netzeronet> wrote in message
news:3893ce06@news.povray.org...

Chris Colefax <cco### [at] geocitiescom> wrote in message
news:388f7793@news.povray.org...
> Steve <sjl### [at] zero-ppslocaldomain> wrote:
> The Liquid Spray include file is really designed for particle sprays, and
> although it will create puddles on flat surfaces it doesn't (yet?) allow you
> to fill containers with liquid.
>
> Instead, I might back-up Peter's suggestion of modelling the flat surface of
> the liquid in sPatch as well, or perhaps a simple disc would be enough.
> Either way, unless you want to give the water an interior for fading or
> media, it should be enough just to model the surface with a suitable texture
> for ripples and such.

Well I'm actually not that good with sPatch could I do a primitave using a
bounded or clipped by or is this against the laws of POV? And I was thinking
about using an interior and making the water transparent or translucent (haven't
decided which).

Post a reply to this message

macro or no, all you would basically need to be doing is CSG difference the
basin from the water spray (union it as a whole by saying union {#include
"spray.inc}) then add in the basin on it's own.

difference {
 spray here
 basin here
}

object {basin here again}

But get that bottle macro, it's great.  Just sounds tougher to me to get set up
for this.

Bob

"The "D"" <the### [at] netzeronet> wrote in message
news:3893ce0d@news.povray.org...

David Wilkinson <dav### [at] cwcomnet> wrote in message
news:44q19ss161s8gfv2gfu9rq4ds1pp1cgb2n@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2000 22:51:53 -0500, "The \"D\"" <the### [at] netzeronet>
wrote:
> If your basin is circular you could use the bottle macro I posted on 21 Dec 99
in
> povray.binaries.scene-files.  This has a macro for the liquid that keeps it
within the
> bottle.

The basin is a union of splines that looks like the bottom half of a sphere
(sorta) with an upside down hollow cone in it. Would the bottle macro work in
that case?

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 29 Jan 2000 12:29:05 -0500, "The \"D\"" <the### [at] netzeronet> wrote:

>
>David Wilkinson <dav### [at] cwcomnet> wrote in message
news:44q19ss161s8gfv2gfu9rq4ds1pp1cgb2n@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2000 22:51:53 -0500, "The \"D\"" <the### [at] netzeronet> wrote:
>> If your basin is circular you could use the bottle macro I posted on 21 Dec 99 in
>> povray.binaries.scene-files.  This has a macro for the liquid that keeps it within
the
>> bottle.
>
>The basin is a union of splines that looks like the bottom half of a sphere (sorta)
with an upside down hollow cone in it. Would the bottle macro work in that case?

It would need a bit of work on it to handle the cone. As the macro uses Bezier splines
it
could be modified to handle any shape. Problem is - is it worth the trouble for just
one
special case?
----------------------------
dav### [at] cwcomnet
http://www.hamiltonite.mcmail.com
----------------------------

Post a reply to this message

David Wilkinson wrote:

> It would need a bit of work on it to handle the cone. As the macro uses Bezier
> splines it could be modified to handle any shape. Problem is - is it worth the
> trouble for just one special case?

Question is does it matter. So the basin has a cone in it. So what !
As long as the cone is not transparent you could run a surface right
through it an no one would ever know.

-- 
Ken Tyler -  1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 30 Jan 2000 08:50:55 -0800, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:

>
>
>David Wilkinson wrote:
>
>> It would need a bit of work on it to handle the cone. As the macro uses Bezier
>> splines it could be modified to handle any shape. Problem is - is it worth the
>> trouble for just one special case?
>
>Question is does it matter. So the basin has a cone in it. So what !
>As long as the cone is not transparent you could run a surface right
>through it an no one would ever know.

Thats right.
----------------------------
dav### [at] cwcomnet
http://www.hamiltonite.mcmail.com
----------------------------

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 29 Jan 2000 12:25:31 -0500, "The \"D\""
<the### [at] netzeronet> wrote:

>
>Peter Popov <pet### [at] usanet> wrote in message
news:+lCQOLXrTb+VgPcVZfTibv8qJKaK@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 26 Jan 2000 11:07:50 +1000, "Chris Colefax"
>> <cco### [at] geocitiescom> wrote:
>> I think a disc *might* work with light fading because after the ray
>> hits it it never leaves and POV may be tricked into thinking it's
>> inside the disc. Didn't someone have a problem with transparent discs
>> and media recently?
>
>Ok I'll look into that. Would the light fading need to be a global setting or for the
disc.

The disc. I haven't tested this, it's just an idea.


Peter Popov
pet### [at] usanet
ICQ: 15002700

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:
> 
> Question is does it matter. So the basin has a cone in it. So what !
> As long as the cone is not transparent you could run a surface right
> through it an no one would ever know.
> 

But YOU would know!
And it would bother you, and you would lay awake at night, hesitant, nervous...

Margus

Post a reply to this message

Margus Ramst wrote:
> 
> Ken wrote:
> >
> > Question is does it matter. So the basin has a cone in it. So what !
> > As long as the cone is not transparent you could run a surface right
> > through it an no one would ever know.
> >
> 
> But YOU would know!
> And it would bother you, and you would lay awake at night, hesitant, nervous...
> 
> Margus

Oh NO ! Not ME ! I would sleep better at night knowing that I did not
needlessly waste my time on something that didn't need it.

-- 
Ken Tyler -  1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message

Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote in message 
news:38946BEF.BD4E2B85@pacbell.net...
> Question is does it matter. So the basin has a cone in it. So what !
> As long as the cone is not transparent you could run a surface right
> through it an no one would ever know.

You know I never thought about that.

Post a reply to this message