Hi people

Since months I'm working a lot with Bruteforcerendering. Such a feature in
Povray wold be gread!!!!

I'm also waiting for the first bruteforcer which supports baking :)

Here a link to Indigo, which uses XML :(
http://www2.indigorenderer.com/

Post a reply to this message

"H. Karsten" <h-karsten()web.de> wrote:
> Since months I'm working a lot with Bruteforcerendering. Such a feature in
> Povray wold be gread!!!!

it would be great to wait about 11 hours to see a perfect physically-accurate
RSOCP?

let the bashing begin!

Post a reply to this message

> "H. Karsten" <h-karsten()web.de> wrote:
>> Since months I'm working a lot with Bruteforcerendering. Such a feature in
>> Povray wold be gread!!!!
> 
> it would be great to wait about 11 hours to see a perfect physically-accurate
> RSOCP?

This isn't brute-force but gets close:
http://www.winosi.onlinehome.de/

Call me when POV-Ray supports *this*!
http://www.winosi.onlinehome.de/Gallery_t15.htm

Post a reply to this message

H. Karsten wrote:
> Hi people
> 
> Since months I'm working a lot with Bruteforcerendering. Such a feature in
> Povray wold be gread!!!!

I'm sorry, what is it?  A google search yields no valuable information.

> I'm also waiting for the first bruteforcer which supports baking :)

Again, what exactly are you waiting for?  A brute force renderer?

> Here a link to Indigo, which uses XML :(
> http://www2.indigorenderer.com/

And this is of interest to us because...?

-- 
...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

There are, roughly speaking, two possible approaches to raytracing:

1) Use the basic backwards raytracing algorithms and simple lighting
   models (essentially the phong lighting model, perhaps some other
   similarly simple lighting models as well).

2) Try to raytrace *everything*, use full BRDFs for surface definitions.

  The advantage of method 2 is that, assuming you have good BRDFs, you
can get quite impressive results at times, while in method 1 there's a
limit on how realistic the image can be.

  The disadvantage of method 2 is that it's not only very slow, it's
*always* slow. You simply *can't* create a very simple scene (eg. a
sphere on a plane) and render it in 0.5 seconds, like you can with
method 1. In many cases the latter is the more desirable method for
this precise reason: It often gives acceptable quality very fast.

  Trying to support both methods at the same time is a bit problematic
too. It's hard to mix them. Basically you would need two separate
rendering engines and a way to choose which one is used where. The
full BRDF definitions are basically useless in method 1.

  If you want POV-Ray to support raytracing with BRDFs, that would
mean basically that two different raytracers would need to be packaged
into one executable, and you simply choose which one is used. The advantage
in this can be dubious. It may be much better to simply have two different
programs.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

> it would be great to wait about 11 hours to see a perfect physically-accurate
> RSOCP?
>
> let the bashing begin!

As I began with PovRay in 1991, I was also waiting about 11 hours for an image.
(and sometimes longer!) And everybody knows that raytracing was the best way to
simulate light - everybody _likes_ to wait 11 hours for a cool image.

I'm not saying, that PovRay has to switch to bruteforce.
Only the possibility of it could be an option.

Take a closer look to these renderers. The are _only_ renderers - not a
3D-programming-environment like PovRay! The syntax often sucks, the options are
weak. No way to make CSG-objects or iso-surfaces...

PovRay could be the coolest bruteforcer without loosing any option of over 10
years Raytracing experience!

Post a reply to this message

H. Karsten <h-karsten()web.de> wrote:
> Take a closer look to these renderers. The are _only_ renderers - not a
> 3D-programming-environment like PovRay! The syntax often sucks, the options are
> weak. No way to make CSG-objects or iso-surfaces...

  Note that those renderers usually use highly-optimized triangle meshes
(in some cases perhaps NUBRSes, which are easily tesselable), and they
*still* manage to spend 11 hours for even the simplest images. Meshes are
very fast to trace. I can only imagine how long it would take if you put
some isosurfaces there...

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

>   Note that those renderers usually use highly-optimized triangle meshes
> (in some cases perhaps NUBRSes, which are easily tesselable), and they
> *still* manage to spend 11 hours for even the simplest images. Meshes are
> very fast to trace. I can only imagine how long it would take if you put
> some isosurfaces there...
>
> --
>                                                           - Warp

Thats right, I have a real fast machine here and was trying to render ISOs
instead of a highfield. It was impossible! and I switched to highfield again...

It's up to the user, I think. And its still cool to see what intensive CPU-Power
is needed to render images.

If its to intensive - just wait years for the image or for new computers ;)

But its not a reason to cancel this feature in PovRay because of slow machines:
PovRay never did this. The limit was _always_ the machine!

Post a reply to this message

"H. Karsten" <h-karsten()web.de> wrote:
> If its to intensive - just wait years for the image or for new computers ;)
>
> But its not a reason to cancel this feature in PovRay because of slow machines:
> PovRay never did this. The limit was _always_ the machine!

yes, that's some food for thought.  Seeing as hardware nowadays is so fast that
raytracing is starting to get used in game engines for real-time applications
and NVidia buying Mental Images mainly for its highly-touted real-time shading
tech Mental Mill, perhaps it is time for stills to move on to more precise and
automatic lighting models...

Post a reply to this message

Take a look at this:)
http://www.openrt.de/

Post a reply to this message