First off, I know of two FEMALE friends of mine that do use Povray...they
don't post anything on here yet, but they do read and are actually quite
good, well at least better than I am. I'm still learning.
   The person that first introduced me to Povray, was still using the dos
version, created stunning images and had them printed out poster size and
sold them as ART. I don't know if he still is or not.
  The point is Povray may be freeware and may not have all the fancy
features of the expensive ones, but if you know what your doing, you can
make images as good as, if not in some cases better than the others.

Post a reply to this message

Because you asked I'll answer that I do.
Time and again people wonder about all this about the kind of people using
POV-Ray Trace.
I have noticed a lot of the people are interested in programming which
simply makes sense if you think about it.  Those that program the program
and those that program IN the program.  Others that somehow claim to have no
abilities of any kind and yet still manage to render out a fine example of
ray tracing.  And so on and so forth.
As for myself, I was always interested in drawing, then the computer came
along (yes, I'm pre-PC age).  I never understood people using computers for
word processing as much as I can understand why for graphics related things.
Early on I was having fun with Basic and getting pixels to draw on the
monitor in simulated 3D ways.  That's what really got me going on the 3D CG
idea.
Also, like many others with limited budgets, I too found POV-Ray to be the
ultimate answer.  After a few encounters with other programs of course;
Generic CAD and 3D Design were two (years ago) of them.  POV-Ray has been
something I followed as it grew and it just fits me like a glove pretty
much.  GUI with the wireframes and all are not something I can handle with
much skill so it has been all the better to have been using POV-Ray.
I can only guess that there are a large number of people similar to me in
this respect.  Then there are those that can apparently control scene files
in a modeler and hand it over to POV-Ray to trace.
One of the most obvious things that holds me captive then is the code to
image concept.  But I believe "niche" would never be the word for it since
it's almost a cult following in many ways.  That could be said of many 3D
programs though.
Okay, so there is my answer in a giant nutshell.

Bob

Post a reply to this message

Adam wrote:

>    What kind of people use Povray? I keep hearing about this "certain
> niche," but more specifically...

In addition to what other people said, there are non-hobby applications of
Povray, usually in the education area. I've seen it being used for teaching
math, chemistry, architecture, physics and biology, for instance. Two
examples among many others :
http://ampere.scale.uiuc.edu/~m-lexa/cell/cell.html
http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~andrbh/raytrace/raytrace.html

Povray is also used is by people who have to make technical 3D images in
sectors where 3D professional renderers are unknown.

About commercial use, it's certainly not competitive due to the long
development process, however a few of us sell images to art patrons,
galleries, or companies. As a matter a fact, I just finished a book cover
for a scientific editor.

G.

Post a reply to this message

I use POV-Ray because it's so much fun.  It's like a massive set of Lego,
Macarno, and plastercein (sp?) all rolled into one, with a bunch of industrial
grade lighting systems thrown in for good measure.  I like art and beautiful
images but can't draw to save my life, so for me POV is a gift from 
the gods, simple enough for me to understand and complicated enough to hold
my interest forever, it seems that POV grows with me. 

-- 
Cheers
Steve              email mailto:ste### [at] zeroppsuklinuxnet

%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee  0 pps. 

web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/

or  http://start.at/zero-pps

  2:30am  up 27 days, 56 min,  2 users,  load average: 1.00, 1.00, 1.11

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:41:12 -0700, Adam <bel### [at] yahoocom> wrote:

>   What kind of people use Povray? 

Basically all kinds of people -- students, parents, artists, engineer
programmers... I haven't noticed a trend in that regard.

>I keep hearing about this "certain niche," but more specifically... 

That niche is, IMHO, defined by a) the cost-quality ratio, b) the
approach, c) the quality of peer and developer support and d) the
challenge

>I don't see many female users for instance. 

It doesn't take many flowers to have a lovely garden.

>Also, the program doesn't seem to be well suited for
>Engineering, drafting, or even designing real-life objects. 

A lot of people model real-life objects in POV. I for one have
modelled some home appliances like a washer and a fridge, to name a
couple. I recall reading a post by a professional product designer who
used POV to model and render his designs (the post featured an
espresso machine IIRC).

>Now, I am well aware that the ray tracer is just made to create 
>images, but that's the problem. Other programs may offer tension or 
>elasticity analyses, or offer  to work with materials with actual 
>physical properties.

POV is not ProEngineer. If it were, I would have never used it because
of the price tag (compared to which Max 3.0 is given away for free).
On the other hand, there are some real-life engineering uses for it.
For example, my brother wrote a program for controlling a machine for
making Fresnel lens. I then used photon mapped caustics to test the
lens, saving thousands of dollars for real-life testing. (And I was
stupid enough not to claim a chunk of this saved money but that's
another story)

>   I haven't heard of any company using POV-ray to design their bikes or
>remote controls, like with Rhino. 

LOL my bike surely looks like it was modelled in Rhino, there's not an
inch of a straight line in it :)

But read above :)

>Povray is too difficult for, say, architecture, since walkthroughs 
>are a pain. 

For design, maybe, but have you thought about lighting? I have a
friend who is an undergraduate in Architecture and we will be doing a
project together, she will do the modelling in ArchiCAD (or AutoCAD)
and I will render it in MegaPOV with radiosity, caustics (for the
pool) and whatnot.

>The features include cylinders, not pipes; "clipped_by," not "window." 
>It seems that everything you do, has to be done from scratch unless 
>you look for include files. 

Well, the legs of my tables are cylinders, not pipes. And the
ventilation holes on my PC case are certainly not windows. What do you
think is better, providing an easy-to-use but limited specific
solution or a somewhat more complex yet much more powerful general
approach?

>Even for graphics, motion picture industries use expensive programs 
>like 3D Studio, and others simply use 2D programs like Photoshop.

Yes but they invest money to make big money. I am certain POV could
get to MAX's level if the POV Team were as big, as well paid and as
well supplied as the MAX development team. But then again, POV would
cost as much as MAX which I would not like at all.

The more you invest, the faster you will work. Commercial products
make the life of the artist easy, so an artist doesn't have to be a
techie, too, or learn programming or anything. I knew a girl who did
wonders in PaintBrush for Windows 3.1 (yeah, in 16 colors!) Imagine
what happened when she finally got Painter. 

>   So what does that leave us with? Artists who want total control over
>the scene? Computer programmers who simply want to challenge themselves?

One word: enthusiasts :)

>In other words, it seems to me that Povray has few practical
>applications, but is more of a hobby, or even a teaching device for
>understanding higher-level programs.

This is quite true, but bear in mind, 'few' is not 'none' :) . The
program is there and it's there for good, what you are able to do with
it is your own business. Some people use it to illustrate the books
they write. Others use it for modelling real-life objects and/or
scenes for one reason or the other. Then there are those who use it to
supplemnent the graphics work they do in professional packages. But
mostly, we're doing it for fun.


Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] usanet
TAG      e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 18:26:51 -0700, Adam <bel### [at] yahoocom> wrote:

>   Then, let me put it this way. Does anyone make good money using Povray.

I've never directly sold a POV picture (animated GIFs are, well,
anims) but I use POV in my web design work. I've rendered some home
appliances for the products section of a home appliances site. I've
used POV a lot to render buttons, animated logos, 3D toolbars and the
like. I know of at least two other people visiting these groups that
can relate.

I also often use it to set up the basic light interraction in a scene
and then paint over that in PhotoShop, keeping the lighting realistic.
An example is the gallery section of a site I am doing (my own,
actually :)) ) where I use MegaPOV's radiosity to render a room with
three picture frames and then use PhotoShop to put the pictures in
there, and the lighting remains intact.

>I'm talking computer art expos, product design teams, architects, city
>planning, anything of the sort. 

I placed fourth in ComputerSpace '97, an international computer arts
compo held in Sofia. The picture I submitted was featured some POV
output collaged and post-processed and painted over in PhotoShop.

As of architecture, POV is not the best tool to model a building but
it can certainly render it better than AutoCAD or ArchiCAD. I guess
only Radiance in this price range could do better.

>I haven't heard anyone say a thing about the usefullness of Povray. 

Had enough? :))

>People have been talking of it as if it were a sport, not a tool. 

Mostly, but not exclusively. It has its uses.

>You have fun, exercise your mind, get your feet wet, join an
>international phenomenon, etc. That's something you say about scooters or
>Pokemon, not a screwdriver or a calculator.

That's the best part with computers. You can use them as calculators,
or for Pokemon (whatever *that* is), or for driving scooters (with a
good 3D card and surround sound :) ) ... you can even use a
screwdriver on them <grin>

So the bottom line is, POV can do a lot, it's up to the user to
choose.


Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] usanet
TAG      e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message

Adam <bel### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
:    So what does that leave us with?

  1) It's free. That can't be said of most "higher-level" programs.

  2) The quality is good. The lack of a modeller is only a little annoyance
     (you can't use a 3rd party modeller anyways).

  3) The scripting language is powerful. Only few other renderers have a
     similar one.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Adam wrote:
> 
>    So, it seems that we agree that Povray is a good free program. It's
> always good to see exactly what you're doing and to be able to
> experiment.  Such is the design. The question is, what are people\
> doing with it?

POV-Ray is an excellent tool for testing one's knowledge of trig and
analytical geometry.  Without a modeler, a firm grasp of AG is
essential in achieving the broadest variety of scenery.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

I've noticed most of the commercial artists are using acrylics and
gouache.  So who uses oil paints? These so-called 'artists'?  Oil paints
take so much longer, and you need to learn how to clean the brushes.

I hope you see my point.

-Mark Gordon

Post a reply to this message

Adam wrote:

>    So what does that leave us with? Artists who want total control over
> the scene? Computer programmers who simply want to challenge themselves?
> In other words, it seems to me that Povray has few practical
> applications, but is more of a hobby, or even a teaching device for
> understanding higher-level programs.

POV-Ray isn't much different from other ray tracers in this regard, so
I'm going to give some examples of use of other ray tracers in my
answers.

Granted, I've not heard of POV-Ray being used in the film industry or in
serious engineering applications.  Ray tracers (BMRT in particular) have
been used from time to time in the film industry (by Pixar), but quite
seldom (only a couple of shots).  I have seen ray tracers (though not
POV-Ray, and the one I'm thinking of is actually a photon-mapping
implementation, so more like MegaPov than POV-Ray) being used in
architecture.  I think ray tracing might be used for car ads once in a
while, since the reflection off car paint is hard to fake, but I don't
think they were using POV-Ray for that (something with NURBS support,
probably).

POV-Ray is certainly used by artists and hobbyists.  It can also be used
by students, since it introduces many of the major concepts in 3D
graphics.  Unlike BMRT, there isn't a commercial application built on
the same scene description language, so it's not so directly useful to
students, who often migrate from BMRT to PRMan.

FWIW, I've found that ray tracers are often written by students as an
exercise.  I'm not sure how many students over the years have gotten
credit for code that they eventually contributed to POV-Ray.

Based on support requests I've gotten (from NASA, med schools, chemistry
departments, etc.) there are some applications to scientific
visualization.  Ray tracing does a lovely job of making pictures of
spheres, and it's popular among many chemists for rendering high-quality
molecular model images.  I've seen it used to generate an animation
showing an asteroid moving in an unusual orbit.  It's sometimes used in
the computer industry in research (mostly in parallel processing) and
sales (look how fast our cluster renders skyvase.pov).

-Mark Gordon

Post a reply to this message