I can tell by the roaring silence. That it is time for a game of PovRay 
Crescent.
Played to the 3.7 Version Rules and using the UberPov variation which 
implies that you cannot render if you have not defined your camera. 
Amongst other things.
I will perform the traditional opening.

Sphere

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

> I can tell by the roaring silence. That it is time for a game of PovRay
> Crescent.
> Played to the 3.7 Version Rules and using the UberPov variation which
> implies that you cannot render if you have not defined your camera.
> Amongst other things.
> I will perform the traditional opening.
>
> Sphere

On reflection that isn't quite the traditional opening. But as it's too 
early in the game to think about the finish, instead I'll shed a bit of 
light on what is going on.

Light_source

Post a reply to this message

On 19/05/2015 13:27, scott wrote:
>> I can tell by the roaring silence. That it is time for a game of PovRay
>> Crescent.
>> Played to the 3.7 Version Rules and using the UberPov variation which
>> implies that you cannot render if you have not defined your camera.
>> Amongst other things.
>> I will perform the traditional opening.
>>
>> Sphere
>
> On reflection that isn't quite the traditional opening. But as it's too
> early in the game to think about the finish, instead I'll shed a bit of
> light on what is going on.
>
> Light_source
>

Yes a traditional opening. And I see that you have responded likewise.
If it is going to be a fencing game. We had better see what the next 
move brings.


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 19/05/15 13:55, Stephen wrote:
> On 19/05/2015 13:27, scott wrote:
>>> I can tell by the roaring silence. That it is time for a game of PovRay
>>> Crescent.
>>> Played to the 3.7 Version Rules and using the UberPov variation which
>>> implies that you cannot render if you have not defined your camera.
>>> Amongst other things.
>>> I will perform the traditional opening.
>>>
>>> Sphere
>>
>> On reflection that isn't quite the traditional opening. But as it's too
>> early in the game to think about the finish, instead I'll shed a bit of
>> light on what is going on.
>>
>> Light_source
>>
> 
> Yes a traditional opening. And I see that you have responded likewise.
> If it is going to be a fencing game. We had better see what the next
> move brings.
> 
> 

macro

John (complicating the game a fraction)
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message

On 19/05/2015 14:01, Doctor John wrote:
> On 19/05/15 13:55, Stephen wrote:
>> On 19/05/2015 13:27, scott wrote:
>>>> I can tell by the roaring silence. That it is time for a game of PovRay
>>>> Crescent.
>>>> Played to the 3.7 Version Rules and using the UberPov variation which
>>>> implies that you cannot render if you have not defined your camera.
>>>> Amongst other things.
>>>> I will perform the traditional opening.
>>>>
>>>> Sphere
>>>
>>> On reflection that isn't quite the traditional opening. But as it's too
>>> early in the game to think about the finish, instead I'll shed a bit of
>>> light on what is going on.
>>>
>>> Light_source
>>>
>>
>> Yes a traditional opening. And I see that you have responded likewise.
>> If it is going to be a fencing game. We had better see what the next
>> move brings.
>>
>>
>
> macro
>

I want to see how Jim answers that move.

> John (complicating the game a fraction)
>
Too soon, my son. Too soon.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 19/05/15 14:14, Stephen wrote:
> On 19/05/2015 14:01, Doctor John wrote
> 
>> John (complicating the game a fraction)
>>
> Too soon, my son. Too soon.
> 

Hardly. I refer you to the original playing of de Groot's variation - a
game which has gone down in history as one of the greatest uses of the
recursive functions.

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 19 May 2015 17:10:07 +0100, Doctor John wrote:

> On 19/05/15 14:14, Stephen wrote:
>> On 19/05/2015 14:01, Doctor John wrote
>> 
>>> John (complicating the game a fraction)
>>>
>> Too soon, my son. Too soon.
>> 
>> 
> Hardly. I refer you to the original playing of de Groot's variation - a
> game which has gone down in history as one of the greatest uses of the
> recursive functions.
> 
> John

I'm going to have a quick move here, since I'm rebooting my Mac during an 
online meeting....

Gradient, naturally.

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On 19/05/2015 17:22, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 19 May 2015 17:10:07 +0100, Doctor John wrote:
>
>> On 19/05/15 14:14, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 19/05/2015 14:01, Doctor John wrote
>>>
>>>> John (complicating the game a fraction)
>>>>
>>> Too soon, my son. Too soon.
>>>
>>>
>> Hardly. I refer you to the original playing of de Groot's variation - a
>> game which has gone down in history as one of the greatest uses of the
>> recursive functions.
>>
>> John
>
> I'm going to have a quick move here, since I'm rebooting my Mac during an
> online meeting....
>
> Gradient, naturally.
>
Well, I'll stop, think and colour the sphere, shiny.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

>> I'm going to have a quick move here, since I'm rebooting my Mac during an
>> online meeting....
>>
>> Gradient, naturally.
>>
> Well, I'll stop, think and colour the sphere, shiny.

Surely a school-boy error? The 3.7 rules clearly state you cannot modify 
an object once it has been created.

Post a reply to this message

On 20/05/2015 07:45, scott wrote:
>>> I'm going to have a quick move here, since I'm rebooting my Mac
>>> during an
>>> online meeting....
>>>
>>> Gradient, naturally.
>>>
>> Well, I'll stop, think and colour the sphere, shiny.
>
> Surely a school-boy error? The 3.7 rules clearly state you cannot modify
> an object once it has been created.
>

I think that you will find that applies only when the object has not 
been called.


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 20/05/2015 07:45, scott wrote:
>>> I'm going to have a quick move here, since I'm rebooting my Mac
>>> during an
>>> online meeting....
>>>
>>> Gradient, naturally.
>>>
>> Well, I'll stop, think and colour the sphere, shiny.
>
> Surely a school-boy error? The 3.7 rules clearly state you cannot modify
> an object once it has been created.
>
I think that you will find that applies only when the object has been 
called.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 20/05/15 09:05, Stephen wrote:
> On 20/05/2015 07:45, scott wrote:
>>>> I'm going to have a quick move here, since I'm rebooting my Mac
>>>> during an
>>>> online meeting....
>>>>
>>>> Gradient, naturally.
>>>>
>>> Well, I'll stop, think and colour the sphere, shiny.
>>
>> Surely a school-boy error? The 3.7 rules clearly state you cannot modify
>> an object once it has been created.
>>
> I think that you will find that applies only when the object has been
> called.
> 
Double post! You are in cache.

Meanwhile, radiosity

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message

On 20/05/2015 09:16, Doctor John wrote:
> On 20/05/15 09:05, Stephen wrote:
>> On 20/05/2015 07:45, scott wrote:
>>>>> I'm going to have a quick move here, since I'm rebooting my Mac
>>>>> during an
>>>>> online meeting....
>>>>>
>>>>> Gradient, naturally.
>>>>>
>>>> Well, I'll stop, think and colour the sphere, shiny.
>>>
>>> Surely a school-boy error? The 3.7 rules clearly state you cannot modify
>>> an object once it has been created.
>>>
>> I think that you will find that applies only when the object has been
>> called.
>>
> Double post!

Where?

Post a reply to this message

On 20/05/2015 09:18, scott wrote:
> On 20/05/2015 09:16, Doctor John wrote:
>> On 20/05/15 09:05, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 20/05/2015 07:45, scott wrote:
>>>>>> I'm going to have a quick move here, since I'm rebooting my Mac
>>>>>> during an
>>>>>> online meeting....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gradient, naturally.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Well, I'll stop, think and colour the sphere, shiny.
>>>>
>>>> Surely a school-boy error? The 3.7 rules clearly state you cannot
>>>> modify
>>>> an object once it has been created.
>>>>
>>> I think that you will find that applies only when the object has been
>>> called.
>>>
>> Double post!
>
> Where?
>
>
Don't worry.
<Hint> How many fingers am I holding up, Sir? </Hint> ;-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 20/05/2015 09:16, Doctor John wrote:
> On 20/05/15 09:05, Stephen wrote:
>> On 20/05/2015 07:45, scott wrote:
>>>>> I'm going to have a quick move here, since I'm rebooting my Mac
>>>>> during an
>>>>> online meeting....
>>>>>
>>>>> Gradient, naturally.
>>>>>
>>>> Well, I'll stop, think and colour the sphere, shiny.
>>>
>>> Surely a school-boy error? The 3.7 rules clearly state you cannot modify
>>> an object once it has been created.
>>>
>> I think that you will find that applies only when the object has been
>> called.
>>
> Double post! You are in cache.
>
> Meanwhile, radiosity
>

Since Radiosity reversed the direction of the raytrace. It must be my turn.

Black Hole Warp.


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 20/05/15 09:54, Stephen wrote:
> 
> Since Radiosity reversed the direction of the raytrace. It must be my turn.
> 
> Black Hole Warp.
> 

That's not a nice thing to call Warp ;-)

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message

>>>> I think that you will find that applies only when the object has been
>>>> called.
>>>>
>>> Double post!
>>
>> Where?
>>
>>
> Don't worry.
> <Hint> How many fingers am I holding up, Sir? </Hint> ;-)

Oh, I thought you were intentionally trying to split the game in two :-)

Post a reply to this message

>>>>>> I'm going to have a quick move here, since I'm rebooting my Mac
>>>>>> during an
>>>>>> online meeting....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gradient, naturally.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Well, I'll stop, think and colour the sphere, shiny.
>>>>
>>>> Surely a school-boy error? The 3.7 rules clearly state you cannot
>>>> modify
>>>> an object once it has been created.
>>>>
>>> I think that you will find that applies only when the object has been
>>> called.
>>>
>> Double post! You are in cache.
>>
>> Meanwhile, radiosity
>>
>
> Since Radiosity reversed the direction of the raytrace. It must be my turn.
>
> Black Hole Warp.

The black hole has done something strange.

Light_source with a negative brightness.

Post a reply to this message

On 20/05/2015 10:48, Doctor John wrote:
> On 20/05/15 09:54, Stephen wrote:
>>
>> Since Radiosity reversed the direction of the raytrace. It must be my turn.
>>
>> Black Hole Warp.
>>
>
> That's not a nice thing to call Warp ;-)
>
Evil is who evil sees.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 20/05/2015 10:54, scott wrote:
>> Since Radiosity reversed the direction of the raytrace. It must be my
>> turn.
>>
>> Black Hole Warp.
>
> The black hole has done something strange.
>
> Light_source with a negative brightness.

Spotted it.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 20/05/2015 10:51, scott wrote:
>>>>> I think that you will find that applies only when the object has been
>>>>> called.
>>>>>
>>>> Double post!
>>>
>>> Where?
>>>
>>>
>> Don't worry.
>> <Hint> How many fingers am I holding up, Sir? </Hint> ;-)
>
> Oh, I thought you were intentionally trying to split the game in two :-)
>

When you worked in Germany. Did anyone ever hold up two fingers to you 
when counting?

A weird feeling.
Sorry I wasn't thinking. But if the... ;-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 20/05/2015 11:39, Stephen wrote:
>
> Spotted it.

That was my move.

I made the light a spot.
I spotted it.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 20 May 2015 21:18:48 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 20/05/2015 11:39, Stephen wrote:
>>
>> Spotted it.
> 
> That was my move.
> 
> I made the light a spot.
> I spotted it.

Spline, because the geometry is all weird now.

Jim



-- 
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and 
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw

Post a reply to this message

On 21/05/2015 06:11, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 20 May 2015 21:18:48 +0100, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 20/05/2015 11:39, Stephen wrote:
>>>
>>> Spotted it.
>>
>> That was my move.
>>
>> I made the light a spot.
>> I spotted it.
>
> Spline, because the geometry is all weird now.

no_cache - this scene is taking forever to render.

Post a reply to this message

> When you worked in Germany. Did anyone ever hold up two fingers to you
> when counting?

Not while counting, no ;-)

Post a reply to this message

On 22/05/2015 09:40, scott wrote:
>> When you worked in Germany. Did anyone ever hold up two fingers to you
>> when counting?
>
> Not while counting, no ;-)
>
>
;-)
Someone did it to me for emphasis. I did not know I could be so shocked 
like that. :-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 22-5-2015 10:43, Stephen wrote:
> On 22/05/2015 09:40, scott wrote:
>>> When you worked in Germany. Did anyone ever hold up two fingers to you
>>> when counting?
>>
>> Not while counting, no ;-)
>>
>>
> ;-)
> Someone did it to me for emphasis. I did not know I could be so shocked
> like that. :-)
>

You don't do that in Britain? As far as I know one can go at least up to 
five for emphasis, 1 being thumb or index. No other meaning involved, 
except for the single middle finger of course ;-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 22/05/15 11:59, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 22-5-2015 10:43, Stephen wrote:
>> On 22/05/2015 09:40, scott wrote:
>>>> When you worked in Germany. Did anyone ever hold up two fingers to you
>>>> when counting?
>>>
>>> Not while counting, no ;-)
>>>
>>>
>> ;-)
>> Someone did it to me for emphasis. I did not know I could be so shocked
>> like that. :-)
>>
> 
> You don't do that in Britain? As far as I know one can go at least up to
> five for emphasis, 1 being thumb or index. No other meaning involved,
> except for the single middle finger of course ;-)
> 

It depends on the orientation of the hand as well as the separation of
the digits.
Palm forward: digits together, two. Digits separated, Victory.
Palm backwards: digits separated, f*** you. Digits together, undefined.

I have started to adopt the (middle-)European way of doing things using
thumb and index finger.

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message

On 22/05/2015 12:11, Doctor John wrote:
> On 22/05/15 11:59, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 22-5-2015 10:43, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 22/05/2015 09:40, scott wrote:
>>>>> When you worked in Germany. Did anyone ever hold up two fingers to you
>>>>> when counting?
>>>>
>>>> Not while counting, no ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ;-)
>>> Someone did it to me for emphasis. I did not know I could be so shocked
>>> like that. :-)
>>>
>>
>> You don't do that in Britain? As far as I know one can go at least up to
>> five for emphasis, 1 being thumb or index. No other meaning involved,
>> except for the single middle finger of course ;-)
>>
>
> It depends on the orientation of the hand as well as the separation of
> the digits.
> Palm forward: digits together, two. Digits separated, Victory.
> Palm backwards: digits separated, f*** you. Digits together, undefined.
>

George Bush, famously did it to a group of Australian farmers, who were 
protesting. He thought it was the peace sign.


> I have started to adopt the (middle-)European way of doing things using
> thumb and index finger.

The Okay sign?



-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 22-5-2015 13:11, Doctor John wrote:
> On 22/05/15 11:59, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 22-5-2015 10:43, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 22/05/2015 09:40, scott wrote:
>>>>> When you worked in Germany. Did anyone ever hold up two fingers to you
>>>>> when counting?
>>>>
>>>> Not while counting, no ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ;-)
>>> Someone did it to me for emphasis. I did not know I could be so shocked
>>> like that. :-)
>>>
>>
>> You don't do that in Britain? As far as I know one can go at least up to
>> five for emphasis, 1 being thumb or index. No other meaning involved,
>> except for the single middle finger of course ;-)
>>
>
> It depends on the orientation of the hand as well as the separation of
> the digits.
> Palm forward: digits together, two. Digits separated, Victory.

Yes, those I know...

> Palm backwards: digits separated, f*** you. Digits together, undefined.

Ah! New meaning to me ;-)

>
> I have started to adopt the (middle-)European way of doing things using
> thumb and index finger.

Yes, that's the way I recognise.

Sign language is an interesting study indeed. How do you call somebody 
to come to you, with your hand? Depending on the country it is waving it 
/towards/ you or /from/ you, with the opposite meaning also of course. 
Can be confusing. :-)


-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 22/05/2015 15:00, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Sign language is an interesting study indeed. How do you call somebody
> to come to you, with your hand? Depending on the country it is waving it
> /towards/ you or /from/ you, with the opposite meaning also of course.
> Can be confusing. :-)

A couple of years ago. I worked with a group of Indians who shook their 
heads when agreeing or for yes.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message