 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I was wondering if the glow feature of POVAFX could possibly be added to
the SuperPatch. I mean, all other (big) 3d packages offer some form of
glow, and media is just too slow and complex for the task. This seemed
to be such a good implementation of simple glowing. If it can't be added
could someone create an equivalent? Thanks in advance to the wonderful
programmer who does this. =)
Here's the address to the page:
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/2143/povafx10.html
--
Anthony L. Bennett
http://welcome.to/TonyB
Graphics rendered
by the Dreamachine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
BTW, if it helps, he has some links to material on this page:
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/2143/tests.html
--
Anthony L. Bennett
http://welcome.to/TonyB
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Never say die. I like the POVAFX custom compile of POV-Ray too. How
about the Jpg thing too, you not going to mention that here as well?
Seriously, simply to be had as a optional part of the other input/output
image formats Jpeg would go well for the disk space conservative minded
and for the direct internet usability, I have to agree.
Damn us non-programmers for our inability to do our own things... but
I'll forgive us.
TonyB wrote:
>
> BTW, if it helps, he has some links to material on this page:
> http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/2143/tests.html
>
> --
> Anthony L. Bennett
> http://welcome.to/TonyB
--
omniVERSE: beyond the universe
http://members.aol.com/inversez/homepage.htm
mailto://inversez@aol.com?Subject=PoV-News
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Never say die. I like the POVAFX custom compile of POV-Ray too. How
> about the Jpg thing too, you not going to mention that here as well?
> Seriously, simply to be had as a optional part of the other input/output
> image formats Jpeg would go well for the disk space conservative minded
> and for the direct internet usability, I have to agree.
> Damn us non-programmers for our inability to do our own things... but
> I'll forgive us.
That has to be added too for Pete's sake. I am actually a programmer, but
Windows programming and C++ scared me away. I never did learn enough C to
really do anything. I never finished the cloth generator. My formulas were
faster, more efficient, and realistic than the ones previously implemented.
It would have been a great tool. I think with the trace() funtion I'm can
redo it in POV script. But that's last on my long list of todos. Sorry
people.
--
Anthony L. Bennett
http://welcome.to/TonyB
Graphics rendered
by the Dreamachine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Difficult come, difficult go.
TonyB wrote:
>
> I never finished the cloth generator. My formulas were
> faster, more efficient, and realistic than the ones previously implemented.
> It would have been a great tool. I think with the trace() funtion I'm can
> redo it in POV script. But that's last on my long list of todos. Sorry
> people.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It isn't really all that complex, it's just that my math/programming hasn't
covered those areas yet. I consulted with my physics teacher, and he helped me
understand the formulas. I just have no idea how to implement them. I did take
the older code and based mine on that. It's practically identical. It just uses
simpler more realistic formulas, plus some extra adjustments. It's very good.
--
Anthony L. Bennett
http://welcome.to/TonyB
Graphics rendered
by the Dreamachine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
