POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.unofficial.patches : First unofficial patch of POV-Ray 3.7.0: UberPOV Server Time
28 Sep 2021 15:48:17 EDT (-0400)
  First unofficial patch of POV-Ray 3.7.0: UberPOV (Message 11 to 16 of 16)  
<<< Previous 10 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages
From: clipka
Subject: Re: First unofficial patch of POV-Ray 3.7.0: UberPOV
Date: 19 Nov 2013 09:09:34
Message: <528b711e$1@news.povray.org>
Am 19.11.2013 14:41, schrieb Ive:
> Ok, something goes wrong.
> While the example scenes do work well a very simple scene of mine (where
> I just did try to add a bit of blurred reflection to a table) did not!
> So I used one of your own scene file (stochastic_reflection_blur.pov)
> and simplified it until it shows the same problem.

I'll dig into this.


Post a reply to this message

From: clipka
Subject: Re: First unofficial patch of POV-Ray 3.7.0: UberPOV
Date: 19 Nov 2013 09:39:41
Message: <528b782d$1@news.povray.org>
Am 19.11.2013 15:09, schrieb clipka:
> Am 19.11.2013 14:41, schrieb Ive:
>> Ok, something goes wrong.
>> While the example scenes do work well a very simple scene of mine (where
>> I just did try to add a bit of blurred reflection to a table) did not!
>> So I used one of your own scene file (stochastic_reflection_blur.pov)
>> and simplified it until it shows the same problem.
>
> I'll dig into this.

Dang, can you believe it? I actually managed to forget to initialize the 
new reflection parameters to their intended defaults.

Should be fixed now.


Post a reply to this message

From: James Holsenback
Subject: Re: First unofficial patch of POV-Ray 3.7.0: UberPOV
Date: 19 Nov 2013 18:07:53
Message: <528bef49$1@news.povray.org>
On 11/19/2013 09:39 AM, clipka wrote:
> Dang, can you believe it? I actually managed to forget to initialize the
> new reflection parameters to their intended defaults.

LOL ... must be contagious


Post a reply to this message

From: clipka
Subject: Re: First unofficial patch of POV-Ray 3.7.0: UberPOV
Date: 19 Nov 2013 21:02:51
Message: <528c184b$1@news.povray.org>
Am 17.11.2013 23:25, schrieb clipka:
> Hi folks,
>
> Anyone interested in test-driving a few unofficial additions to POV-Ray
> 3.7.0, please have a look at https://github.com/UberPOV/UberPOV.

...

> More is yet to come. An obvious next step will be to implement a Monte
> Carlo-based replacement for radiosity (I guess you know where this is
> heading), but a few odds & ends will also be thrown in, such as a
> feature to determine the modification time of a file (so that you can
> e.g. decide whether some auto-generated files might be outdated).


An update is available at the aforementioned location, introducing that 
file_time function.

The update also contains a few official bugfixes that haven't made it 
into the POV-Ray Git repo yet.


Post a reply to this message

From: Tim Cook
Subject: Re: First unofficial patch of POV-Ray 3.7.0: UberPOV
Date: 20 Nov 2013 18:05:20
Message: <528d4030$1@news.povray.org>
On 2013-11-18 09:36, clipka wrote:
> I know that you love that trick, and have in some tutorial made claims
> that it is a sufficient replacement for inbuilt blurred reflections, but
> the above facts make it no more than a nasty kludge. One that can be
> used to good effect if you invest sufficient time and effort, but a
> kludge nonetheless.

Micronormals (which is how real-world blurred reflections happen, afaik) 
are a kludge?  I'd think the inbuilt blurred reflection would be moreso, 
as it's a corner-cutting technique to save time and computational 
resources...  ;)

(Of course, this is semantic and depends on whether your ideal rendering 
engine allows processes indistinguishable from reality or not.)


Post a reply to this message

From: clipka
Subject: Re: First unofficial patch of POV-Ray 3.7.0: UberPOV
Date: 20 Nov 2013 18:42:02
Message: <528d48ca$1@news.povray.org>
Am 21.11.2013 00:03, schrieb Tim Cook:
> On 2013-11-18 09:36, clipka wrote:
>> I know that you love that trick, and have in some tutorial made claims
>> that it is a sufficient replacement for inbuilt blurred reflections, but
>> the above facts make it no more than a nasty kludge. One that can be
>> used to good effect if you invest sufficient time and effort, but a
>> kludge nonetheless.
>
> Micronormals (which is how real-world blurred reflections happen, afaik)
> are a kludge?  I'd think the inbuilt blurred reflection would be moreso,
> as it's a corner-cutting technique to save time and computational
> resources...  ;)

Indeed, but the inbuilt ones are not /nasty/ :-P (because they're much 
easier to use).

That said, the most kludgy thing ot the "current trick" (in terms of 
realism, not in terms of ease of use as I originally meant) is not so 
much that it uses micronormals in the first place, but that it averages 
multiple micronormals textures to achieve the oversampling required. 
Real-world blurred reflections normally don't do /that/ ;-).


Post a reply to this message

From: Alain
Subject: Re: First unofficial patch of POV-Ray 3.7.0: UberPOV
Date: 23 Nov 2013 18:26:09
Message: <52913991$1@news.povray.org>

> Am 21.11.2013 00:03, schrieb Tim Cook:
>> On 2013-11-18 09:36, clipka wrote:
>>> I know that you love that trick, and have in some tutorial made claims
>>> that it is a sufficient replacement for inbuilt blurred reflections, but
>>> the above facts make it no more than a nasty kludge. One that can be
>>> used to good effect if you invest sufficient time and effort, but a
>>> kludge nonetheless.
>>
>> Micronormals (which is how real-world blurred reflections happen, afaik)
>> are a kludge?  I'd think the inbuilt blurred reflection would be moreso,
>> as it's a corner-cutting technique to save time and computational
>> resources...  ;)
>
> Indeed, but the inbuilt ones are not /nasty/ :-P (because they're much
> easier to use).
>
> That said, the most kludgy thing ot the "current trick" (in terms of
> realism, not in terms of ease of use as I originally meant) is not so
> much that it uses micronormals in the first place, but that it averages
> multiple micronormals textures to achieve the oversampling required.
> Real-world blurred reflections normally don't do /that/ ;-).
>
I totaly agree, but your eyes /do/ average several "samples" as the 
actual micronormals are so small that each retina receptors actualy 
"see" many at once...


Post a reply to this message

<<< Previous 10 Messages Goto Initial 10 Messages

Copyright 2003-2021 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.