// Bob's Toy Top motion_blur example for MegaPOV [watch for line wrapping of
comments!]

#version 3.1;

// declaring clock as anything else doesn't work apparently
/*
#declare clock_type="D"
#include "clockmod.inc"
#declare dC=mclock;

#declare clock_type="S"
#include "clockmod.inc"
#declare sC=mclock;
*/

global_settings
{
  assumed_gamma 2.2 // PC
   // timestamp 1,5
  motion_blur 16,1.001-(pow(clock, .5 / 1)) // deceleration taken from
C.C.'s ClockMod.inc
}

// ----------------------------------------
camera
{
  location  <-3, 4.5, -9>
  direction 1.5*z
  right     4/3*x
  look_at   <.5, 1.5, 0>
}

sky_sphere
{
  pigment
  {
    gradient y
    color_map { [0 color rgb <.6,.8,.9>] [.25 color rgb <.3,.6,1>] [1 color
rgb <.1,.3,.6>] }
  }
}

light_source
{
  0*x // light's position (translated below)
  color rgb 1.5  // light's color
  translate <-30, 30, -30>
}

#declare C=clock;  // motion blur won't accept this either

// ----------------------------------------
plane { y, 0 clipped_by {box {-1,1 scale <10,1,10>}} pigment {color rgb
<0.7,0.5,0.3>}}

// $blur=yes;

// #if(blur)

motion_blur{

  union{

    cone {0,1,-2*y,0}
    sphere { 0, 1}
    torus {.5,.25 clipped_by {cylinder {-.25*y,.25*y,.5}} translate 1.125*y}
    texture {pigment {radial frequency 8} finish{specular .75 metallic 1
brilliance 1}}
  }

  // scale clock+.5
   translate (1.25-(.5-(clock*.5)))*y // move object down first to get
wobble
// rotate 720*dC*y rotate sC*60*x rotate (720-(360*sC))*y  // non-working
way
  rotate -(90*(1-(sin((clock - .5) * pi) / 2 + .5)))*y // S-wave taken from
C.C.'s ClockMod.inc
   rotate (pow(clock, 2)*(60*sin((clock - .5) * pi) / 2 + .5))*x // S-wave
taken from C.C.'s ClockMod.inc
    rotate (540-(1080*(pow(clock, .5 / 1))))*y // deceleration taken from
C.C.'s ClockMod.inc
  translate (1.25-(.425*clock))*y  // move back up so tip is at plane (not
accurate!)

 // translate <0,2,6*clock>
}

// #end


// omniVERSE
// http://users.aol.com/inversez/

Post a reply to this message

Take note that Nathan has said to put any clock redefinitions directly into
the motion_blur statement and it will see them fine from there.

Bob

"omniVERSE" <inv### [at] aolcom> wrote in message
news:385921d0@news.povray.org...
> // Bob's Toy Top motion_blur example for MegaPOV [watch for line wrapping
of
> comments!]
>
> #version 3.1;
>
> // declaring clock as anything else doesn't work apparently
> /*
> #declare clock_type="D"
> #include "clockmod.inc"
> #declare dC=mclock;
>
> #declare clock_type="S"
> #include "clockmod.inc"
> #declare sC=mclock;
> */
>
> global_settings
> {
>   assumed_gamma 2.2 // PC
>    // timestamp 1,5
>   motion_blur 16,1.001-(pow(clock, .5 / 1)) // deceleration taken from
> C.C.'s ClockMod.inc
> }
>
> // ----------------------------------------
> camera
> {
>   location  <-3, 4.5, -9>
>   direction 1.5*z
>   right     4/3*x
>   look_at   <.5, 1.5, 0>
> }
>
> sky_sphere
> {
>   pigment
>   {
>     gradient y
>     color_map { [0 color rgb <.6,.8,.9>] [.25 color rgb <.3,.6,1>] [1
color
> rgb <.1,.3,.6>] }
>   }
> }
>
> light_source
> {
>   0*x // light's position (translated below)
>   color rgb 1.5  // light's color
>   translate <-30, 30, -30>
> }
>
> #declare C=clock;  // motion blur won't accept this either
>
> // ----------------------------------------
> plane { y, 0 clipped_by {box {-1,1 scale <10,1,10>}} pigment {color rgb
> <0.7,0.5,0.3>}}
>
> // $blur=yes;
>
> // #if(blur)
>
> motion_blur{
>
>   union{
>
>     cone {0,1,-2*y,0}
>     sphere { 0, 1}
>     torus {.5,.25 clipped_by {cylinder {-.25*y,.25*y,.5}} translate
1.125*y}
>     texture {pigment {radial frequency 8} finish{specular .75 metallic 1
> brilliance 1}}
>   }
>
>   // scale clock+.5
>    translate (1.25-(.5-(clock*.5)))*y // move object down first to get
> wobble
> // rotate 720*dC*y rotate sC*60*x rotate (720-(360*sC))*y  // non-working
> way
>   rotate -(90*(1-(sin((clock - .5) * pi) / 2 + .5)))*y // S-wave taken
from
> C.C.'s ClockMod.inc
>    rotate (pow(clock, 2)*(60*sin((clock - .5) * pi) / 2 + .5))*x // S-wave
> taken from C.C.'s ClockMod.inc
>     rotate (540-(1080*(pow(clock, .5 / 1))))*y // deceleration taken from
> C.C.'s ClockMod.inc
>   translate (1.25-(.425*clock))*y  // move back up so tip is at plane (not
> accurate!)
>
>  // translate <0,2,6*clock>
> }
>
> // #end
>
>
> // omniVERSE
> // http://users.aol.com/inversez/
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

omniVERSE wrote:

>// Bob's Toy Top motion_blur example for MegaPOV [watch for line wrapping of
>comments!]
>...

Thanks Bob,

Ingo

-- 
Photography: http://members.home.nl/ingoogni/
Pov-Ray    : http://members.home.nl/seed7/

Post a reply to this message

omniVERSE wrote in message <385921d0@news.povray.org>...
>// [watch for line wrapping of comments!]
Why does this happen and is there anything one can do
to prevent it.


BTW nice top.

Peter

Post a reply to this message

Peter Warren wrote:

>   omniVERSE wrote in message <385921d0@news.povray.org>...
> >// [watch for line wrapping of comments!]
> Why does this happen and is there anything one can do
> to prevent it.
>
> BTW nice top.
>
> Peter

Well, the posting software usually can be set to send things out
correctly, but any Microsoft reading software is broken and in direct
violation of the RFC's, goes ahead and wraps it for you when it comes
in. Just more of MS software being "helpful" and knowing better than you
the ignorant user and "better than" the standards created by the entire
global community.

oooh.. and don't even get me started on how horribly they handle
standard mail...

--
"My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks
But it was obsolete before I opened the box" - W.A.Y.

Post a reply to this message

"Jon A. Cruz" wrote:

> Peter Warren wrote:
>
> >   omniVERSE wrote in message <385921d0@news.povray.org>...
> > >// [watch for line wrapping of comments!]
> > Why does this happen and is there anything one can do
> > to prevent it.
> >
> > BTW nice top.
> >
> > Peter
>
> Well, the posting software usually can be set to send things out
> correctly, but any Microsoft reading software is broken and in direct
> violation of the RFC's, goes ahead and wraps it for you when it comes
> in. Just more of MS software being "helpful" and knowing better than you
> the ignorant user and "better than" the standards created by the entire
> global community.
>
> oooh.. and don't even get me started on how horribly they handle
> standard mail...
>

oops. Sorry. Forgot that there was an actual solution for the problem.

Install Netscape and use that for newsreading. Set the option to not wrap
incoming messages (which should not be needed, but is a work-around hack
for malformed posts from broken posting software such as MS Outlook)

--
"My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks
But it was obsolete before I opened the box" - W.A.Y.

Post a reply to this message

"Jon A. Cruz" wrote:


> correctly, but any Microsoft reading software is broken and in direct
> violation of the RFC's,

What does RFC stand for ?

-- 
Ken Tyler -  1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:

> "Jon A. Cruz" wrote:
>
> > correctly, but any Microsoft reading software is broken and in direct
> > violation of the RFC's,
>
> What does RFC stand for ?
>

Well, since I understand Ken is not a programmer, I'll take it as an honest
question. (If it were coming from a programmer, especially one doing any
net programming at all, that question should have required an extremely
flame-on slam... but that's another story.)

From foldoc:
http://www.nightflight.com/cgi-bin/foldoc.cgi?query=rfc
gives
http://www.nightflight.com/cgi-bin/foldoc.cgi?Request+For+Comments


> Request For Comments
>
> <standard> (RFC) One of a series, begun in 1969, of numbered Internet
> informational documents and standards widely followed by commercial
> software and freeware in the Internet and Unix communities. Few RFCs are
> standards but all Internet standards are recorded in RFCs. Perhaps the single
> most influential RFC has been RFC 822, the Internet electronic mail format
> standard.
>
> The RFCs are unusual in that they are floated by technical experts acting on
> their own initiative and reviewed by the Internet at large, rather than
> formally promulgated through an institution such as ANSI. For this reason,
> they remain known as RFCs even once adopted as standards.
>

So, the standards for Mail, news messages, news transport, MIME, etc. are
all in RFC's. Too bad the MS programmers seem to not bother reading them
fully. (MSIE is also broken in HTTP/MIME, and in one point the spec even
has it in bold not to do what MS went ahead and did).

( if you're interested in what that one of the many is, see
http://www.geocities.com/joncruz/web_midi.htm#tell_isp )

--
"My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks
But it was obsolete before I opened the box" - W.A.Y.

Post a reply to this message

"Jon A. Cruz" wrote:
> 
> Ken wrote:
> 
> > "Jon A. Cruz" wrote:
> >
> > > correctly, but any Microsoft reading software is broken and in direct
> > > violation of the RFC's,
> >
> > What does RFC stand for ?
> >
> 
> Well, since I understand Ken is not a programmer, I'll take it as an honest
> question. (If it were coming from a programmer, especially one doing any
> net programming at all, that question should have required an extremely
> flame-on slam... but that's another story.)

Thank you for your thoughtful reply. In my business the holy grail of
specifications is the US Mil Specs. Barring available Mil Specs for a
job we design by customer specifications or through I.E.E.E. specification.
I then percieve the RFC to be basicaly a general consensus among those
in the know about how basic internet protocols are to be handled in the
absence of an "official" decree on the matter.

-- 
Ken Tyler -  1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:

> Thank you for your thoughtful reply. In my business the holy grail of
> specifications is the US Mil Specs. Barring available Mil Specs for a
> job we design by customer specifications or through I.E.E.E. specification.
> I then percieve the RFC to be basicaly a general consensus among those
> in the know about how basic internet protocols are to be handled in the
> absence of an "official" decree on the matter.
>

Actually, in the Internet world, the RFC's are the "official" decrees. It's just
that instead of some comitee sitting isolated in some little room and deciding
things that have little or no bearing on the real world, the work is done in
public, in full view of the entire world, and by anyone who cares to mess in it.
Thus the world takes them as the "authoritative" source of information. It's
somewhat like scientific peer-review taken to a much higher level.

Thus, when in the past when I've encountered a senior software archetect
responsible for crafting a client-server solution with Internet connectivity,
etc. who seriously asked "What's an RFC?", you can just imagine my reaction.

--
"My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks
But it was obsolete before I opened the box" - W.A.Y.

Post a reply to this message