 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 12:20:15 GMT, ken### [at] uniplan it (Angelo 'kENpEX' Pesce) wrote:
> There's someone else (not just someone, many
> ppl in fact) that need *also* something different? Why povray should
> not take care of them?
Povray takes care of them. Povray gives SDL and source code. You can write own
macro and/or own patch. You have skills for it as it sounds. Nearly all new
features from new 3.5 were intruduced (but rewritten) by the community members.
You can think about POV-Team like coordinators (the elders?) of wide community
IMO. Nearly all features proposed by you were concerned and don't expect
different discussion. The team want concern on bug instead of repeating
arguments another time. The team said in this discussion they think about all
this things since years. The team said it is not as easy as it sounds. If you
want you can support them preparing own patch instead of involving them into
discussion with repeatitions.
ABX
--
#declare _=function(a,b,x){((a^2)+(b^2))^.5-x}#default {pigment{color rgb 1}}
union{plane{y,-3}plane{-x,-3}finish{reflection 1 ambient 0}}isosurface{ //ABX
function{_(x-2,y,1)|_((x+y)*.7,z,.1)|_((x+y+2)*.7,z,.1)|_(x/2+y*.8+1.5,z,.1)}
contained_by{box{<0,-3,-.1>,<3,0,.1>}}translate z*15finish{ambient 1}}//POV35
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 13:39:18 +0100, "Thorsten Froehlich"
<tho### [at] trfde> wrote:
>In article <3c0f58f7.2085159@news.povray.org> , ken### [at] uniplanit (Angelo
>'kENpEX' Pesce) wrote:
>
>> Well mabye this is the politic of high-expensive apps (dunno, I don't
>> see this politic, but mabye it is, or if it isn't it will be :P), and
>> I know that pov-team should not work to maya or softimage exporters.
>> But they could extend the SDL so that writing such exporters is easier
>> and comfortable...
>
>But there is absolutely no feature missing in POV-Ray that you would need to
>successfully export those formats to POV-Ray. If nodboy has done it so far
>you can hardly blame POV-Ray for it.
I think that there is some feature missing for that. This is what I'm
trying to say in this thread... If U don't think so, please explain me
why a program like lightflow (yes I always talk about that renderer,
it's only because I know it a bit more than others, don't blame me)
that's really new (1 or 2 years old?) developed by a single person,
that is NOT opensource at all (not so free) and this is something that
should really go against it, I mean if I don't have the sources I
don't know the inner-workings, it's lots harder to do an accurate
exporter, well, why this program that seems to be so inadeguate for
3rd party development actually already has a working maya and 3dsmax
exporter, while noone in 10 years made a good exporter for those
super-wide-spread packages with povray... Mabye there is some
difference...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
<abx### [at] babilonorg> wrote:
>On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 12:20:15 GMT, ken### [at] uniplanit (Angelo 'kENpEX' Pesce) wrote:
>> There's someone else (not just someone, many
>> ppl in fact) that need *also* something different? Why povray should
>> not take care of them?
>Povray takes care of them. Povray gives SDL and source code. You can write own
>macro and/or own patch. You have skills for it as it sounds. Nearly all new
>features from new 3.5 were intruduced (but rewritten) by the community members.
>You can think about POV-Team like coordinators (the elders?) of wide community
>IMO. Nearly all features proposed by you were concerned and don't expect
>different discussion. The team want concern on bug instead of repeating
>arguments another time. The team said in this discussion they think about all
>this things since years. The team said it is not as easy as it sounds. If you
>want you can support them preparing own patch instead of involving them into
>discussion with repeatitions.
Ok, fine you're right, I'm wrong. But I had no way to know this...
Please try to make a faq about wish-lists and requested features, well
you can even not make it, but such threads will be repeated I think...
I'll repeat that, if I don't know what is going on, how should I
decide to make a patch? It's stupid to make a patch if a feature is
already planned and if my patch will be thrown away in the next povray
release (as pov-team does not integrate patches, they are rewriting
the patch). I don't want to do a work that mabye someone else will
redo, so my patch will die (because, who will use it if there's in the
official povray release?) and my work be wasted. I think this is
really easy to understand...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alessandro Coppo wrote:
>
> It came to me that displacement mapping is almost like isosurfaces. For
> example, a displacement mapped sphere is an isosurface described by
> a sphere + displacement function. So I would not call it impossible (or
> only for meshes) but "just" computationally heavy.
>
I just want to mention that this is not really true, 'displacement' with
isosurfaces works much different than with meshes. For example in your
sphere sample you can get separate surface parts with an isosurface while
this is impossible with displacement mapping.
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I think this thread alone is a very good example to explain why there is
no
> completely open discussion of the development of POV-Ray or a completely
> open development. There would simply be too many people who only tell
those
> who actually implement feature that something is easy or that it should be
> implemented this way or that way. However, so rarely do the people who do
> all the discussion actually do any work. They just keep everyone from
> working while contributing nothing usable.
well, may be you re right.. but
how do you explain the success of others open source projects ?
moreover AFAIK many features of pov3.5 came from patches written by people
not in the povteam, those same people you seem to think they can't bring
anything interesting. Sure, those patches may need some rewrite, better
integration and so on yet i think they definitively help povray to gain more
features the pov-team alone may not have think about
M
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 12:51:22 GMT, ken### [at] uniplanit (Angelo 'kENpEX' Pesce) wrote:
> I know what there is into povray, I wanted to know where povray will
> go...
Everybody want it.
> But an interface between povray
> team and povray users is necessary
http://tag.povray.org/
ABX
--
#declare _=function(a,b,x){((a^2)+(b^2))^.5-x}#default {pigment{color rgb 1}}
union{plane{y,-3}plane{-x,-3}finish{reflection 1 ambient 0}}isosurface{ //ABX
function{_(x-2,y,1)|_((x+y)*.7,z,.1)|_((x+y+2)*.7,z,.1)|_(x/2+y*.8+1.5,z,.1)}
contained_by{box{<0,-3,-.1>,<3,0,.1>}}translate z*15finish{ambient 1}}//POV35
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Lightflow has no "interface" so I won't talk about that... Lightflow
> is only a library of routines to perform raytracing, the phyton stuff
> is only a port of that library to phyton, if U like ruby more, you
> could use the lib with ruby, if U like java you can use java, if U
> like c++....
> Lightflow has no "standard" scripting language like pov
Well I can download the python version just like that from the server. In order to
use something else I need to roll my own, which is a big problem for a lot of
users. That is maybe the same amount of work that's needed to do you pov 4
wishlist. And following your argument here all you need to do is wait a few months
download the pov 3.5 sources and start patching ;)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:04:23 +0100, "Mael" <mae### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> how do you explain the success of others open source projects ?
As Thorsten said it was his personal opinion.
Check the official status of the team within "POV-Ray 4 Status" at "POV-Team
Status Report - September 1, 2000".
ABX
--
#declare _=function(a,b,x){((a^2)+(b^2))^.5-x}#default {pigment{color rgb 1}}
union{plane{y,-3}plane{-x,-3}finish{reflection 1 ambient 0}}isosurface{ //ABX
function{_(x-2,y,1)|_((x+y)*.7,z,.1)|_((x+y+2)*.7,z,.1)|_(x/2+y*.8+1.5,z,.1)}
contained_by{box{<0,-3,-.1>,<3,0,.1>}}translate z*15finish{ambient 1}}//POV35
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3c0f635a.4744504@news.povray.org> , ken### [at] uniplanit (Angelo
'kENpEX' Pesce) wrote:
> Premature. Now I want to know, are U going to change ray-sphere
> intersection? Do U see new techniques to do 3d vector cross product?
> dot product? Matrix-vector product?
No, but neither of those will even benefit a single cycle if you do them in
hand written assembler. They are too small and linear to offer any improved
speed. Any instruction scheduler of a reasonable compiler (which are the
compilers the POV-Team is using) will be better than a human optimizing the
same code. To the contrary, most compilers have global optimization
strategies that you effectively kill by adding bits and pieces of inline
assembler because most compilers won't for good reasons not touch (read:
optimize) user supplied hand written assembler code...
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <slr### [at] fwicom> , Ron Parker
<ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
> Except he was replying to me, and I created this so-called "trick." It's
> not a trick.
Sorry, lack of a fully threaded tree-view in my newsreader (OE Mac) makes it
hard to follow complex threads :-(
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
