 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 06/11/2011 11:21 AM, gregjohn wrote:
> If you model something in 3DS or Blender, what is
> the specific benefit of porting to povray?
As far as I can tell, "not much".
The whole benefit of POV-Ray is that it can render things which aren't
meshes, and hence can't be moddelled with a mesh moddeller.
Having said that, I'm not really sure what capabilities other renderers
have. Certainly ones optimised for realtime work tend not to have
sophisticated light transport, with things like caustics, soft shadows,
etc. Then again, I hear there's a new vogue for "unbiased" renderers,
which are even more realistic than POV-Ray. (And, one presumes,
consequently they must be crushingly slow...)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 06.11.2011 20:05, schrieb Orchid XP v8:
> Having said that, I'm not really sure what capabilities other renderers
> have. Certainly ones optimised for realtime work tend not to have
> sophisticated light transport, with things like caustics, soft shadows,
> etc. Then again, I hear there's a new vogue for "unbiased" renderers,
> which are even more realistic than POV-Ray. (And, one presumes,
> consequently they must be crushingly slow...)
You mean something like MCPov?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"gregjohn" <pte### [at] yahoo com> wrote:
> Thanks for all the discussion. But pretty much everyone is touting the beauty
> of povray in "the way *I* use it". But no one really answered the question as to
> the guy from the audience. If you model something in 3DS or Blender, what is
> the specific benefit of porting to povray? "Best Renderer Evah!!!!!" is
> probably the gist of the answer: I want details.
Well, if you're developing a scene in POV-Ray (using the aforementioned kick-ass
algorithmic geometry and texturing) that also requires hand-modelled elements,
then importing a mesh is very important :)
Bill
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> POV-Ray can render curved surfaces which are ACTUALLY CURVED.
>
> All those other modellers and renderers just *approximate* curves. In a
> normal renderer, a "sphere" is really a polygedron, with the lighting
> blurred a bit so that it looks smooth. (Unless you look at the profile.
> Or the shadow. Or where the shape intersects something else. Or...) When
> POV-Ray renders a sphere, it is perfectly spherical.
>
> Fundamentally, representing a sphere as a mesh is WRONG. Granted, that's
> not a very rational argument. But to me, meshes just seem so stupid and
> unsophisticated. Mathematical perfection is so much more exciting...
So that's where povray excels at, huh? Spheres and infinite planes. Too bad
RSOCPs are so rare in real life. Can you spot any spheres around you right now?
Thought so.
Right now one of GPUs main quests centers around automatic rendering of
tesselated surfaces. One day you'll have pretty much perfect polygon curves
close up without even asking for it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 06.11.2011 20:05, schrieb Orchid XP v8:
>
> > Having said that, I'm not really sure what capabilities other renderers
> > have. Certainly ones optimised for realtime work tend not to have
> > sophisticated light transport, with things like caustics, soft shadows,
> > etc. Then again, I hear there's a new vogue for "unbiased" renderers,
> > which are even more realistic than POV-Ray. (And, one presumes,
> > consequently they must be crushingly slow...)
>
> You mean something like MCPov?
Probably. He certainly wasn't thinking of Blender's new Cycles or other gpu
unbiased (mesh-based) renderers out there.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 07/11/2011 10:39 AM, nemesis wrote:
> So that's where povray excels at, huh? Spheres and infinite planes.
More like "anything with a tractible mathematical description". It's
amazing what you can do with a handful of isosurfaces...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> On 07/11/2011 10:39 AM, nemesis wrote:
>
> > So that's where povray excels at, huh? Spheres and infinite planes.
>
> More like "anything with a tractible mathematical description". It's
> amazing what you can do with a handful of isosurfaces...
You didn't answer my question. :)
But yeah, abstract art and landscapes are possible with isosurfaces. And, hey!,
almost as slow as non-gpu unbiased renderers.
But call me when you have the proper isosurface functions for a car, a spoon or
an animal.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> So that's where povray excels at, huh? Spheres and infinite planes.
>>
>> More like "anything with a tractible mathematical description". It's
>> amazing what you can do with a handful of isosurfaces...
>
> You didn't answer my question. :)
You said "is povray only good at spheres and planes?" And I pointed out
that, no, it's good at far more than that.
> But yeah, abstract art and landscapes are possible with isosurfaces. And, hey!,
> almost as slow as non-gpu unbiased renderers.
Well nobody is *forcing* you to use POV-Ray. :-P
> But call me when you have the proper isosurface functions for a car, a spoon or
> an animal.
Since I can't draw those anyway, it's kind of moot to me...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> >>> So that's where povray excels at, huh? Spheres and infinite planes.
> >>
> >> More like "anything with a tractible mathematical description". It's
> >> amazing what you can do with a handful of isosurfaces...
> >
> > You didn't answer my question. :)
>
> You said "is povray only good at spheres and planes?" And I pointed out
> that, no, it's good at far more than that.
It was the previous question: do you see any spheres around you right now?
Yep, the only usual geometric surface you find is boxes in one way or another,
but most times they have beveled edges.
> > But call me when you have the proper isosurface functions for a car, a spoon or
> > an animal.
>
> Since I can't draw those anyway, it's kind of moot to me...
and since it's moot to you, it's moot to everyone else as well.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/6/2011 6:21 AM, gregjohn wrote:
> "gregjohn"<pte### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
>> Povray: what's it good for?
>>
>
> Thanks for all the discussion. But pretty much everyone is touting the beauty
> of povray in "the way *I* use it". But no one really answered the question as to
> the guy from the audience. If you model something in 3DS or Blender, what is
> the specific benefit of porting to povray? "Best Renderer Evah!!!!!" is
> probably the gist of the answer: I want details.
POV-Ray's scene description language is very adept for modeling and
rendering objects that are made up of spheres, tori, cylinders, cones,
boxes, and the like. However, the SDL is not very good at representing
organic shapes like humans and animals.
Therefore many users develop the organic characters in a modeling
application and export it to POV-Ray, and then incorporate that exported
model into a POV-Ray scene that also contains models that the SDL does well.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
