POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.windows : The question about depth image generation : Re: The question about depth image generation Server Time
27 Sep 2021 06:43:32 EDT (-0400)
  Re: The question about depth image generation  
From: Kenneth
Date: 16 Feb 2018 12:35:06
Message: <web.5a87163133e225a2a47873e10@news.povray.org>
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:

> > This changes your scene's version number to 3.5, *if* you leave out
> > a #version directive in your scene...
>
> Actually pretty much the very opposite happens.
>
> The standard include files (including `colors.inc`) have the following
> structure:
>
>     #ifndef(Foo_Inc_Temp)
>     #declare Foo_Inc_Temp = version;
>     #version 3.5; // typical; value may differ
>     ...
>     #version Foo_Inc_Temp;
>     #end
>
> This structure is designed to reset the effective language version back
> to whatever it was before the include file.

Yep, I do understand that; but I didn't understand why the ending #version
statement was NOT changing it back (in the case when there was no #version
number in the scene file itself.) My only guess was, for some reason or other
the #version 'compatibility' was staying at 3.5. (Or maybe 3.62, as you
mentioned?) I didn't know how to explain that in detail :-)

BTW, I was running the examples in v3.7.1 beta 9, but adding #version 3.7 into
the scene instead (or not, to see the difference.) Just tried the scene using
#version 3.71 (or not); same behavior that I described. The other 'variable' was
assumed_gamma 1.0. Adding it to the scene -- even without a #version number--
fixed all the problems (no change in the gray color or gamma behavior, with or
without "colors.inc.") I think I understand that: The example code uses gradient
-z... which by default is using 'linear' rgb values... which agrees with
'linear' assumed_gamma 1.0 no matter what.


Post a reply to this message

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