In article <39EDB704.5B0909EE@alpharay.de>, Paul Blaszczyk 
<3d### [at] alpharayde> wrote:

> Sorry..i have post now one in text mode...

"Suggestion:  particles (TEXT)"? It is still HTML.


> The idea was to chosse how a emitter start and stop. So you can create
> things like a rotating sprinkler or a lok (puffing smoke).

Oh, a sequence of turning on and off...this would be taken care of by 
the spline. I also plan on making different ways to "repeat" the 
spline...for example:
go from start to end, then stop

go from start to end, then start over from the beginning

go from start to end, then backwards to the beginning, than forwards 
again...

And various other ways to automatically "warp" the waveform of the 
spline. These could also be useful in pattern waveforms...

-- 
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/

<><

Post a reply to this message

Hi,

i have a small suggestion for the particle-generator.
The first idea is a "attack" and "delay" value, to set how much
particles
begin or end to flow (the second were to set the speed of particles!)
The sencond idea is to do a list for set more then one start/end value
for particles.

Like this:

particles_time {
     1,50 ,5,1.0 ,10,0        //means:  start at frame 1 end at frame 50

                                  //Particles needs 5 frames at start to
go to 100 % of particle-"rate" and 10 frames at end to go to

0%
     80,150 ,1,0.5 ,1 ,0.5   //Start at frame 80 and end at frame 150
    //Go to 100 % of "rate" after one frame and to 50 % at the last
frame
     200,250,49,1.0,1,0.0   //Start at frame 200 and go to frame 250
     //Go from 50 % (see last line!! 0.5) to 100 % at frame 249 (49
long) then stop at the last frame (0 %)
}

To simulate a sprinkler you must use something like this (for a 25 FPS
animation):
particles_time {
     1,20,5,1,1,0  //go from frame 1 to 5 at 100 % and go to 0 % at last
frame
   //pause of 10 frames
     30,40,5,1,1,0 //Go from frame 30 to 35 at 100 % and go to 0 % at
last frame
   //pause of 10 frames
     50,60,5,1,1,0 //Go from frame 60 to 65 at 100 % and go to 0 % at
last frame
 //and so on..
 //also possible (and easier) with a loop and variables
}

Have someone understand me??  ;-)

Paul

Post a reply to this message

Chris Huff wrote:



>> The idea was to chosse how a emitter start and stop. So you can create
>> things like a rotating sprinkler or a lok (puffing smoke).

>  Oh, a sequence of turning on and off...this would be taken care of by
>  the spline. I also plan on making different ways to "repeat" the
>  spline...for example:
>  go from start to end, then stop

With this it would be also possible to use the spray-emitter for a "real"
spray   :-)   (to colour something or write
something on a wall ;)

Paul

Post a reply to this message

Chris Huff wrote:

> Please do not post in HTML. For one thing, it made your message much
> larger than it needed to be, and it is not readable on all newsreaders.

#declare sarcasm=on;

Shouldn't we simply tell those with the archaic readers simply to upgrade to

cannot read a bleeding edge video format.

#declare sarcasm=off;

I would argue for a common courtesy codec for posting images and videos as
well.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:35:24 -0400 "Greg M. Johnson"
<"gregj;-()"@aol.c;-()om> wrote:

>#declare sarcasm=on;
>
>Shouldn't we simply tell those with the archaic readers simply to upgrade to

>cannot read a bleeding edge video format.
>
>#declare sarcasm=off;

  No, Greg, it's simpler to ask that we extend the courtesy of posting
in a format (or sans format, actually) that can be read with *any*
newsreader, be it Netscape, MSIE, Agent, or slrn. HTML is fine for Web
pages and (arguably) software documentation but there are really few
benefits (specified fonts, colored text) I can think of for posting HTML
on a news server.

>I would argue for a common courtesy codec for posting images and videos as
>well.

  For example?

-- 
Alan - ako### [at] povrayorg - a k o n g <at> p o v r a y <dot> o r g
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer

Post a reply to this message

In article <39edd11b@news.povray.org>, "Greg M. Johnson" 
<"gregj;-()"@aol.c;-()om> wrote:

> Shouldn't we simply tell those with the archaic readers simply to 
> upgrade to Win2000 and Netscape or MSIE?? That is in essence what we 
> say when someone cannot read a bleeding edge video format.

I upgraded from Netscape Navigator to MT-NewsWatcher...which is 
definitely not "archaic". Navigator was too big, slow, and buggy. I 
tried Outlook Express...it is no longer on my machine, enough said.
I am definitely not going to get Win2000...that would mean replacing all 
my software and nearly all my hardware, downgrading to an OS that I 
consider inferior, and that software you mentioned will run on Macs.
And besides, they not only are unreadable by many newsreaders, but they 
take up more server space, which is in limited supply.


> I would argue for a common courtesy codec for posting images and 
> videos as well.

For images: I think it has generally been agreed that JPEG format images 
are the best choice, and small PNG's or GIF's are acceptable if JPEG 
compression hurts the image.
For movies, it probably would be a good idea in theory to set some sort 
of standard...but actually choosing one would be difficult, some people 
probably wouldn't be able to create them, and you would be leaving out 
any new, possibly better formats. New movie codecs and formats seem to 
appear far more often than new image formats...

-- 
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/

<><

Post a reply to this message

I hope that you gentlemen realize that I don't *actually* suggest that say
Win95 is really better than Linux or that you should *actually* install
Netscape if your it's not the best for your current business and hobby use.
My use of "archaic" was intentionally ironic.

I   *am* suggesting that asking someone to run out and get divx or mpeg-29b
or a more gif-friendly viewer  just for *your* anim is like asking someone
to get MSIE.

Some people might have as severe limitations on these viewers in their
workplace (or income bracket or hard disk space)  as others might in their
newsgroup readers!


Chris Huff wrote:

> In article <39edd11b@news.povray.org>, "Greg M. Johnson"
> <"gregj;-()"@aol.c;-()om> wrote:
>
> > Shouldn't we simply tell those with the archaic readers simply to
> > upgrade to Win2000 and Netscape or MSIE?? That is in essence what we
> > say when someone cannot read a bleeding edge video format.
>
> I upgraded from Netscape Navigator to MT-NewsWatcher...which is
> definitely not "archaic". Navigator was too big, slow, and buggy. I
> tried Outlook Express...it is no longer on my machine, enough said.
> I am definitely not going to get Win2000...that would mean replacing all
> my software and nearly all my hardware, downgrading to an OS that I
> consider inferior, and that software you mentioned will run on Macs.
> And besides, they not only are unreadable by many newsreaders, but they
> take up more server space, which is in limited supply.
>
> > I would argue for a common courtesy codec for posting images and
> > videos as well.
>
> For images: I think it has generally been agreed that JPEG format images
> are the best choice, and small PNG's or GIF's are acceptable if JPEG
> compression hurts the image.
> For movies, it probably would be a good idea in theory to set some sort
> of standard...but actually choosing one would be difficult, some people
> probably wouldn't be able to create them, and you would be leaving out
> any new, possibly better formats. New movie codecs and formats seem to
> appear far more often than new image formats...
>
> --
> Christopher James Huff
> Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
> TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
>
> <><

Post a reply to this message

In article <39EE2019.DC790D60@my-dejanews.com>, 
gre### [at] my-dejanewscom wrote:

> I hope that you gentlemen realize that I don't *actually* suggest 
> that say Win95 is really better than Linux or that you should 
> *actually* install Netscape if your it's not the best for your 
> current business and hobby use. My use of "archaic" was intentionally 
> ironic.
> 
> I   *am* suggesting that asking someone to run out and get divx or 
> mpeg-29b or a more gif-friendly viewer  just for *your* anim is like 
> asking someone to get MSIE.

I kind of guessed that after reading your message a second time...which 
is why I posted a bit at the bottom about the difficulties in choosing a 
standard video format.

-- 
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/

<><

Post a reply to this message

"Greg M. Johnson" wrote:

> Some people might have as severe limitations on these viewers in their
> workplace (or income bracket or hard disk space)  as others might in their
> newsgroup readers!

Or stupid sysadmins preventing us from installing new codecs
-
Bye
Pabs

Post a reply to this message

Also Chis could we have a system whereby you can specify a certain number of
particles to be created at the start of the simulation in certain positions?

--
Bye
Pabs

Post a reply to this message