 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Michael DiDonato wrote:
>
>
>> Of course one could mention that there are macromolecular graphics
>> programs that support animation with povray in one form or other.
>> Hope this helps.
>>
>
> Do you know of any?
>
VMD, Ribbons, Dino, pyMol and well glr ( shameless promotion of my
program :)
L.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Deaken wrote:
> Chris Howie wrote:
> >
> > rotate <0,clock,0> // move clock into the desired axis
>
> That's the second time I've seen that particular rotate used in this
> thread. Well, the first one was "rotate clock * y". In neither case was
> there a Start_ or End_Clock mentioned.
>
> Am I a complete idiot for using "rotate <0, 360*clock, 0>", or did two
> people make the same mistake? Both of these options? Neither?
>
> Deaken (who has set followups, since this is not a unix question)
rotate clock * y is an alternative to rotate <0,clock,0> as y = <0,1,0> .
Yes and you are right that I did not mention start and end. I don't have the
exact commandline syntax or the stuff that you put in the .ini file in my
head right now which is why I said look it up in the manual. Of course if
you plan to have say n images with the first and last being identical one
should use something like this
rotate clock * 360 / n * y // where clock goes from 0 to n. Unless I am
mistaken the user can assign any real value to clock and it will go from
start to end; so you can use integral values that match the frame number or
fractions from 0 to 1. Talking so much about it I looked it up : the
command line switch is +k and in the .ini
file it would be clock=### where ### is a start value. Look at povray 3.1
documentation like pov115.htm#_Toc449951170.
L.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3C495FC2.470A0742@sw-tech.com>, Deaken <dwy### [at] sw-tech com>
wrote:
> Am I a complete idiot for using "rotate <0, 360*clock, 0>", or did two
> people make the same mistake? Both of these options? Neither?
That is actually probably the best way to do it...if you write all your
scenes to work with the default [0, 1] range, you will have an easier
time moving code between them. It could also get harder to control when
you modify the clock range.
It's probably a matter of personal prefrence, though making the clock
run from 0 to 360 just for a rotation seems like a bad idea...what if
you then want to add translation by 1 unit over the course of the
animation?
--
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Deaken" <dwy### [at] sw-techcom> wrote :
>
> Am I a complete idiot for using "rotate <0, 360*clock, 0>", or did two
> people make the same mistake? Both of these options? Neither?
No, yes, no, no.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Deaken" <dwy### [at] sw-techcom> wrote in message
news:3C495FC2.470A0742@sw-tech.com...
> Chris Howie wrote:
> >
> > rotate <0,clock,0> // move clock into the desired axis
>
> That's the second time I've seen that particular rotate used in this
> thread. Well, the first one was "rotate clock * y". In neither case was
> there a Start_ or End_Clock mentioned.
>
> Am I a complete idiot for using "rotate <0, 360*clock, 0>", or did two
> people make the same mistake? Both of these options? Neither?
If you're asking whether or not clock by itself will rotate 360 degrees,
then no. Not necessarily anyway, unless you specify a Intitial_Clock=1 and
Final_Clock=360 for INI file.
If you asked if rotate clock * y is same as <0,clock,0> then the answer is
yes. Or in your example, rotate 360*clock*y.
bob h
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lothar Esser wrote:
>
> Deaken wrote:
>
> > Chris Howie wrote:
> > >
> > > rotate <0,clock,0> // move clock into the desired axis
> >
> > That's the second time I've seen that particular rotate used in this
> > thread. Well, the first one was "rotate clock * y". In neither case was
> > there a Start_ or End_Clock mentioned.
> >
> > Am I a complete idiot for using "rotate <0, 360*clock, 0>", or did two
> > people make the same mistake? Both of these options? Neither?
>
> rotate clock * y is an alternative to rotate <0,clock,0> as y = <0,1,0> .
Right. I'm sorry, I was unclear in my question. My point was not that the
individual x/y/z names are shorthands for the vectors, it was that some
people multiply by the clock, whereas I multiply by (the clock times 360).
In fact, I had originally written "y*360*clock", but changed it for the sake
of clarity.
> rotate clock * 360 / n * y // where clock goes from 0 to n.
The general form of what I use. I am not good enough to generalize the
method and use clocks that are not simply 0-1.
Deaken
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
bob h wrote:
>
> "Deaken" <dwy### [at] sw-techcom> wrote in message
> news:3C495FC2.470A0742@sw-tech.com...
> > That's the second time I've seen that particular rotate used in this
> > thread. Well, the first one was "rotate clock * y". In neither case was
> > there a Start_ or End_Clock mentioned.
> >
> > Am I a complete idiot for using "rotate <0, 360*clock, 0>", or did two
> > people make the same mistake? Both of these options? Neither?
>
> If you're asking whether or not clock by itself will rotate 360 degrees,
> then no. Not necessarily anyway, unless you specify a Intitial_Clock=1 and
> Final_Clock=360 for INI file.
Actually, I was asking if my belief (that this was incorrect) was correct.
I think that means the same thing as what you said...
Deaken
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Am I a complete idiot for using "rotate <0, 360*clock, 0>", or did two
> people make the same mistake? Both of these options? Neither?
No, you're right. It escaped me again. 360*clock IS correct.
Sorry about the error.
__________________
Chris Howie
cra### [at] yahoocom
http://winimizer.virtualave.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Howie wrote:
>
> > Am I a complete idiot for using "rotate <0, 360*clock, 0>", or did two
> > people make the same mistake? Both of these options? Neither?
>
> No, you're right. It escaped me again. 360*clock IS correct.
>
> Sorry about the error.
Oh, no need to apologize. Being a rank amateur, I wanted to make sure that
I wasn't doing something that merely LOOKED like it was working, or
overworking the problem (a major fault of mine), or something along those
lines.
Deaken
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Try this:
http://www.mol.biol.ethz.ch/wuthrich/software/molmol/
d.
"Michael DiDonato" <did### [at] scrippsedu> wrote in message
news:3C48BA7A.B612C665@scripps.edu...
> ********************************
>
Not sure how your scene is structured but one thing that comes to
mind
would be to put all your objects into a union like
union {
sphere ...
triangle ...
// up to here are your objects
rotate clock * y
}
Read the part about animation in the manual of povray. There is a
clock
variable that can be set and if you use povray's animation feature
this
variable is increased
with each new frame.
Of course one could mention that there are macromolecular graphics
programs that support animation with povray in one form or other.
Hope this helps.
Lothar.
--
Dr. Lothar Esser
NIH / NCI
Tel. 301-435-6163
email les### [at] helixnihgov
Do you know of any?
--
*********************************
Michael DiDonato, PhD
The Scripps Research Institute
Department of Molecular Biology
Maildrop MB4
10550 North Torrey Pines Road
La Jolla, CA, 92037
Tel: (858) 784-9261
FAX: (858) 784-2277
http://www.scripps.edu/~didonato
*********************************
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'iso-8859-1' (3 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
