On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 23:27:05 GMT, Angelo 'kENpEX' Pesce wrote:
> Yes, I know, I should stop, but by reading the ng I had another little
> idea, this is so litte and stupid that mabye can find its way: add a
> switch to have zbuffer output (mhm and mabye normal output too). This
> is useful to do postprocessing... I won't do that again, I promise :)

It wouldn't be the first time that one came up.  My first POV patch was
to do that.  But it's never made it into the official version.

-- 
#macro R(L P)sphere{L F}cylinder{L P F}#end#macro P(V)merge{R(z+a z)R(-z a-z)R(a
-z-z-z a+z)torus{1F clipped_by{plane{a 0}}}translate V}#end#macro Z(a F T)merge{
P(z+a)P(z-a)R(-z-z-x a)pigment{rgbf 1}hollow interior{media{emission 3-T}}}#end 
Z(-x-x.2x)camera{location z*-10rotate x*90normal{bumps.02scale.05}}

Post a reply to this message

Angelo 'kENpEX' Pesce wrote in message
<3c0ff429.41821426@news.povray.org>...
>On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 23:22:05 +0200, Vahur Krouverk
><vkr### [at] comtradeee> wrote:
>I see POV-Ray
>>mainly as cheap (in terms of price, not possibilities!) tool for
>>hobbists and beginners in CG area, from POV-Ray they can move to more
>>proffessional and effective tools (like H.E. Day did).
>
>Well I think that this is not the objective of povray... If this is,
>all the stuff I posted here is a complete nonsense...

Congratulations!  You've figured out why everyone is reacting to you the way
they are.  Most people here see POV-Ray as a low-cost rendering program
where high quality, not rendering speed, is the priority.

--
Mark

Post a reply to this message

Mahalis wrote in message <3c0fe805$1@news.povray.org>...
>"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote in message
>news:slr### [at] fwicom...
>> The text on the about box.  It was hard to find for me too, initially.
>
>It's been equally (or more so) hard for me. I tried Ctrl+every letter key
>and Alt+every letter key and nothing happened.


How odd.  It took me about 60 seconds of staring at the about box to figure
it out.

--
Mark

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 17:15:15 GMT, ken### [at] uniplanit (Angelo 'kENpEX' Pesce) wrote:
> Mhm, it's more severe a crash of a rendering farm (rendering farm?
> povray does not *officialy* support distribuited rendering... well
> mabye you was thinking of a screamernet rendering farm :P)

The reason pov not support renderfarm (there are some render farms on the net
with pov) shouldn't disable writing good renderfarms by patchers becouse of bugs
not related with net. How could it be created without stable application
http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/pbourke/rendering/marsonline/ ?

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 22:49:43 GMT, ken### [at] uniplanit (Angelo 'kENpEX' Pesce) wrote:
> I'm not doing any critic to current povray status

I feel it between lines :-)

> but many (not every) ppl here replyied me just saying this is
> impossible

Sometimes impossible according to POV, not impossible at all imo.

> that, povray already supports this thing and better than
> every other renderer

You should replace "and" with "sometimes" imo

> the thread just died...

There is nonsense for another repeat in the same thread.

> For example the nurbs stuff, most
> ppl here believed that those should be done by the modeller so the
> mesh support in povray was already the "state of the art".

Is there any universal modeller without nurbs traingulated just for screen
presentation?

> Well, when
> I demonstrated that most commercial renderers support nurbs directly
> noone talked about this, they said those ideas are already known...

They said it before your demonstration. And you missed other arguments.

> How can U tell that if many ppl believed that this was simply a bad
> thing to do?

But... who is "U" in this question ? Vahur ?

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 6 Dec 2001 20:43:16 -0500, Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg>
wrote:

>On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 23:27:05 GMT, Angelo 'kENpEX' Pesce wrote:
>> Yes, I know, I should stop, but by reading the ng I had another little
>> idea, this is so litte and stupid that mabye can find its way: add a
>> switch to have zbuffer output (mhm and mabye normal output too). This
>> is useful to do postprocessing... I won't do that again, I promise :)
>
>It wouldn't be the first time that one came up.  My first POV patch was
>to do that.  But it's never made it into the official version.
I know... Why it's never made it into the official version? I mean, is
so easy and so useful...

Post a reply to this message

Okay, then maybe I'm an idiot. I'll try that 2...

> How odd.  It took me about 60 seconds of staring at the about box to
figure
> it out.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:04:22 -0500, "Mahalis" <don### [at] fakeycom> wrote:
> Okay, then maybe I'm an idiot.

Don't worry, you are not alone ... :-(

(could it be something wrong with some windows components ?)

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

Angelo 'kENpEX' Pesce <ken### [at] uniplanit> wrote:
:>  This just says that the Codewarrior debugger is better than gdb. I have
:>no objections to that. I have never used that debugger, but if you say it's
:>better, I have no reason to not to believe you.
:>  However, the fact that there exist debuggers that are better than gdb
:>doesn't make the latter "bad".

: "  A properly configured Emacs and a proper knowledge of makefiles is
: the best
: IDE one may wish."

: Being the "best" should mean that no other thing is better than it...

  I think that "IDE" and "debugger" are two different things.

-- 
#macro N(D,I)#if(I<6)cylinder{M()#local D[I]=div(D[I],104);M().5,2pigment{
rgb M()}}N(D,(D[I]>99?I:I+1))#end#end#macro M()<mod(D[I],13)-6,mod(div(D[I
],13),8)-3,10>#end blob{N(array[6]{11117333955,
7382340,3358,3900569407,970,4254934330},0)}//                     - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

On 7 Dec 2001 07:17:47 -0500, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:

>Angelo 'kENpEX' Pesce <ken### [at] uniplanit> wrote:
>:>  This just says that the Codewarrior debugger is better than gdb. I have
>:>no objections to that. I have never used that debugger, but if you say it's
>:>better, I have no reason to not to believe you.
>:>  However, the fact that there exist debuggers that are better than gdb
>:>doesn't make the latter "bad".
>
>: "  A properly configured Emacs and a proper knowledge of makefiles is
>: the best
>: IDE one may wish."
>
>: Being the "best" should mean that no other thing is better than it...
>
>  I think that "IDE" and "debugger" are two different things.
Integrated Development Environment... That means editor, compiler,
linker, debugger, profiler... Of course if U think that emacs is an
IDE, then surely a debugger is not a part of your IDE :P

Post a reply to this message