I'd like a 64-bit version of Moray because I use Win7 64-bit.

The error messages in OP are POV-Ray 3.7 specific?

ANy help would be appreciated.

Post a reply to this message

On 1/26/2012 3:10 AM, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> I'd like a 64-bit version of Moray because I use Win7 64-bit.
>
> The error messages in OP are POV-Ray 3.7 specific?
>
> ANy help would be appreciated.

If you can do some coding yourself, I'd suggest a small utility that 
strips the offending lines from the .INI.  Pipe Moray to that utility, 
and the utility to PovRay.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

Thanks for the suggestion John but I don't code much. Regards.

Post a reply to this message

On 2012-01-26 02:02, Saul Luizaga wrote:
> So, this means I need POV-Ray 3.6 32-bit?

This is, unfortunately, a known issue; Moray simply doesn't work with 
newer than POV...3.5, actually, in my experience.  We just have to 
muddle along, manually exporting and loading into POV 3.7 by hand until 
the powers that be take pity on us and get Moray up to speed.

I haven't even touched 3D with any seriousness in a long time, now...  :(

--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
http://www.lifemax.net/TimCook

Post a reply to this message

I'm gonna use blender then.

Well unfortunately POV-Ray development is really slow compared to other 
open source freeware, maybe a reason Megapov and other POV-Ray based 
renderers exist, forking the code, instead of team up helping 1 single 
cause to get stronger but well, thank God there are good replacements 
for POV-Ray, I'll still have it as a reference but as someone else 
pointed out 3.7 versions in 10+ years is not a good ritm and I don't 
think I'll ever use POV-Ray as my main raytracer that I had intended.
Is my sentiment that many feel the same and are doing the same as I 
will, too bad POV-Ray deserved better because I think it had potential. 
It is what it is.

Cheers.

Post a reply to this message

I remember, that by chance I visited Blender website (it was tech news 
at the time) when it first got released as open-source freeware, it had 
less features than POV-Ray, they were calling for webmasters, developers 
to get involved and people to help them get organized, pretty much 
starting from almost scratch in many ways; I honestly felt sorry for 
them they were really pathetic and I was sorry I could lend a had at 
all. Of course POV-Ray looked pretty solid in comparison.

Look at them now...

Roles are opposite now, at least to me.

As I wrote, POV-Ray could have gone a similar destiny, but well, things 
happen for a reason as they say, reasons that can't be helped I suppose 
since I doubt the developers are letting POV-Ray fall back like that 
intentionally.

I'm worried that this path POV-Ray has taken is one of a long and slow 
death. It could take another 10 years, unless they reorganize as Blender 
did.

Because I recently made a Google search for photo-realistic renderers 
and I was surprised how many they are, and "Yet Another [fill here}" 
open-source freeware/share projects are spreading.

I have realized that people has a lot of fixed ideas and they don't 
accept suggestions easily, so I think this is 1 big obstacle when trying 
to do this open-source freeware projects, pride and and stubbornness 
mostly, people prefer the long way instead of coordinate and cooperate 
with other people, selfishness of creativity, etc. You need your 
creative space but this is childish... really sad...

For example I as people in FS SCP (www.hard-light.net) to consult 
POV-Ray developers since POV-Ray is already on the other side of the 
fence of multi-thread and 64-bit, but no sir, "we have our own 
resources" crap, fine so be it...

Cheers.

Post a reply to this message

Saul Luizaga wrote:
Correction:
> For example I *asked* people...

PS: Is a shame you can't correct your messages in a newsgroup.

Post a reply to this message

Le 14/02/2012 12:35, Saul Luizaga a écrit :
> 
> I'm worried that this path POV-Ray has taken is one of a long and slow
> death. It could take another 10 years, unless they reorganize as Blender
> did.

The transition to 3.7 is taking more than expected, as it run so far on
only a few people with small free time. It is a needed larva stage, to
adapt to modern world.

Once out, you can probably expect some replay of the megapov series (or
whatever name, it started as superpatch... ). This uncontrolled sandbox
might be the fertile ground for selecting new features in official line.
(as It happened from 3.1 to 3.5 and 3.6...)

If you have extra energy right now, it would be good to revive the IRTC
(not dedicated to povray but Cheepa is not the same good name), but it's
a long and tiring dedication (setting the website, computing result and
so on). Maybe you can regroup with a few interested people.

Why is there no fertile jungle right now: because 3.7 was such a major
rewrite (in term of internal coding) that making patches while the 3.7
was not stable is kind of a waste of energy.

About the cited site: yet another website that assume that the reader
know what they are all about. It took me a few real minutes to find
something which explain FS, at least at the outer level. In a world of
google search, more than 15 seconds of reading for search is far too long!

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 07:42:58 -0400, Saul Luizaga wrote:

> Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Correction:
>> For example I *asked* people...
> 
> PS: Is a shame you can't correct your messages in a newsgroup.

You can, cancel and repost.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 14/02/2012 12:35, Saul Luizaga a écrit :
>>
>> I'm worried that this path POV-Ray has taken is one of a long and slow
>> death. It could take another 10 years, unless they reorganize as Blender
>> did.
>
> The transition to 3.7 is taking more than expected, as it run so far on
> only a few people with small free time. It is a needed larva stage, to
> adapt to modern world.
>
> Once out, you can probably expect some replay of the megapov series (or
> whatever name, it started as superpatch... ). This uncontrolled sandbox
> might be the fertile ground for selecting new features in official line.
> (as It happened from 3.1 to 3.5 and 3.6...)

As I wrote instead of uniting forking, Blender made the opposite and it 
was better, a lot. Also I feel is only a handful of people actually 
doing POV-Ray coding, 1 more thing forking is not helping with and since 
"foreign" coders are making improvements that later will integrated the 
official version seems redundant and inefficient.

> If you have extra energy right now, it would be good to revive the IRTC
> (not dedicated to povray but Cheepa is not the same good name), but it's
> a long and tiring dedication (setting the website, computing result and
> so on). Maybe you can regroup with a few interested people.

I wish I had the time, IRTC is mostly dead, POV-Ray is no longer a 
reference to test performance, etc; is falling behind...

> Why is there no fertile jungle right now: because 3.7 was such a major
> rewrite (in term of internal coding) that making patches while the 3.7
> was not stable is kind of a waste of energy.

I understand but again, wasn't carried out the best way IMO, I think the 
devs are about 5 if so, the rest of POV-Ray effort is forked out.

> About the cited site: yet another website that assume that the reader
> know what they are all about. It took me a few real minutes to find
> something which explain FS, at least at the outer level. In a world of
> google search, more than 15 seconds of reading for search is far too long!

Dude, you complain without pain, if you could only see the website I 
have been, you wouldn't complain for a few seconds even a few minutes. 
They use custom Google search so it shouldn't be difficult and their 
forums is pretty organized and you can easily know what they're about.

Post a reply to this message