 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
When talking about a POV-Ray render, is it okay to call it a "rendering"?
Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25/08/2018 05:46, Mike Horvath wrote:
> When talking about a POV-Ray render, is it okay to call it a "rendering"?
>
>
> Mike
Mister Wikipedia says that it is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendering_(computer_graphics)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/25/2018 3:05 AM, Stephen wrote:
> On 25/08/2018 05:46, Mike Horvath wrote:
>> When talking about a POV-Ray render, is it okay to call it a "rendering"?
>>
>>
>> Mike
>
>
> Mister Wikipedia says that it is.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendering_(computer_graphics)
>
Good. I used the term somewhere else once and someone made a joke about
making glue or something.
Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 08/25/2018 03:05 AM, Stephen wrote:
> On 25/08/2018 05:46, Mike Horvath wrote:
>> When talking about a POV-Ray render, is it okay to call it a "rendering"?
>>
>>
>> Mike
>
>
> Mister Wikipedia says that it is.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendering_(computer_graphics)
>
"Tracing every particle of light in a scene is nearly always completely
impractical and would take a stupendous amount of time."
First time I've seen 'stupendous' used in a wikipedia article.
--
dik
Rendered 1024 of 921600 pixels (0%)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25/08/2018 08:55, Mike Horvath wrote:
> On 8/25/2018 3:05 AM, Stephen wrote:
>> On 25/08/2018 05:46, Mike Horvath wrote:
>>> When talking about a POV-Ray render, is it okay to call it a
>>> "rendering"?
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>>
>> Mister Wikipedia says that it is.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendering_(computer_graphics)
>>
>
> Good. I used the term somewhere else once and someone made a joke about
> making glue or something.
>
>
Horses, parts of dead ones were rendered into glue. Yes, no?
I looked up almost half a dozen online dictionaries and could not find
the CG meaning. So maybe it is jargon.
Thinking about it. I would not use it to normal people. :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25/08/2018 09:14, dick balaska wrote:
> On 08/25/2018 03:05 AM, Stephen wrote:
>> On 25/08/2018 05:46, Mike Horvath wrote:
>>> When talking about a POV-Ray render, is it okay to call it a "rendering"?
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>>
>> Mister Wikipedia says that it is.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendering_(computer_graphics)
>>
> "Tracing every particle of light in a scene is nearly always completely
> impractical and would take a stupendous amount of time."
>
> First time I've seen 'stupendous' used in a wikipedia article.
>
Out of 5,693,256 English articles on Wikipedia. Only 664 contain the
word Stupendous. What are the odds?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=stupendous+&title=Special:Search&go=Go&searchToken=cwf5abl45pgctxuo2btwp3mlh
http://wikicount.net/
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 08/25/2018 05:55 AM, Stephen wrote:
> So maybe it is jargon.
> Thinking about it. I would not use it to normal people. :)
well i get odd looks when i do
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/25/2018 6:05 AM, Stephen wrote:
> Out of 5,693,256 English articles on Wikipedia. Only 664 contain the
> word Stupendous. What are the odds?
>
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=stupendous+&title=Special:Search&go=Go&searchToken=cwf5abl45pgctxuo2btwp3mlh
>
>
>
> http://wikicount.net/
>
>
How many use "ridonculous"?
Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26/08/2018 01:11, Mike Horvath wrote:
> On 8/25/2018 6:05 AM, Stephen wrote:
>> Out of 5,693,256 English articles on Wikipedia. Only 664 contain the
>> word Stupendous. What are the odds?
>>
>>
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=stupendous+&title=Special:Search&go=Go&searchToken=cwf5abl45pgctxuo2btwp3mlh
>>
>>
>>
>> http://wikicount.net/
>>
>>
>
> How many use "ridonculous"?
>
>
> Mike
55
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=ridonculous&title=Special:Search&profile=default&fulltext=1&searchToken=86166ol3ogb9v7wxt2l5nd1l3
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26/08/2018 00:39, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 08/25/2018 05:55 AM, Stephen wrote:
>> So maybe it is jargon.
>> Thinking about it. I would not use it to normal people. :)
>
> well i get odd looks when i do
>
I get those look anyway. ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
