Fabian Brau wrote:
> 
> > For example Nathan changed the way that layered filtered
> > pigments work and that caused some people some problems using existing
> > include files that use that feature.
> 
> If I remember well, Nathan has also changed the way to calculate the
> normals. Could you tell me if the "official" way to calculate the
> normals is buggy or not. This mean that if it is buggy, the next release
> of the official POVRAY could be corrected. If this is not a bug and if
> Nathan do this for another reason, so I will know that the official and
> the Nathan release will never calculate in the same way :).

The official version is buggy.

#declare My_Normal = normal { bumps .5 scale .5 }

#declare Texture =
 texture {
  pigment { rgb 1 }
    normal { My_Normal scale 1.5 }
 }

  In the example the scale after My_Normal does not work correctly in the
official version. Nathan has fixed this in the unofficial version. This
bug will be fixed in POV-Ray v3.5.

-- 
Ken Tyler -  1200+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://www.povray.org/links/

Post a reply to this message

Hi Ken, you recently wrote in povray.windows:

> 
>   I have also heard that there are some problems with getting patched
> versions to work directly from within Moray but I don't remember
> specifics (see some of the past messages in the Moray group). 
The SuperPatch has a bug that prevents it from sending the rendered
pixels to Moray, so you will not get a preview in Moray's windows.
There should be no other problems (the rest of what you and other
posters said still applies, of course).

- Lutz
  email : lut### [at] stmuccom
  Web   : http://www.stmuc.com/moray

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 03 Dec 1999 11:17:42 GMT, Lutz Kretzschmar wrote:
>Hi Ken, you recently wrote in povray.windows:
>
>> 
>>   I have also heard that there are some problems with getting patched
>> versions to work directly from within Moray but I don't remember
>> specifics (see some of the past messages in the Moray group). 
>The SuperPatch has a bug that prevents it from sending the rendered
>pixels to Moray, so you will not get a preview in Moray's windows.
>There should be no other problems (the rest of what you and other
>posters said still applies, of course).

It might be fixed in the 3.1g superpatch; I can't remember if I got
Lutz's fix in there or not.  Could someone with Moray and the 3.1g
superpatch give it a try?

-- 
These are my opinions.  I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
The superpatch: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/superpatch/
My other stuff: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html

Post a reply to this message

Bill DeWitt <the### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
: I think you are asking if a patched version will offer you any -improvement-
: in your images without you having to add to your scene file. If so, the
: answer is no.

  Radiosity might be an exception to this.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Unfortunately, Moray generally won't let you choose values that will give
the best results for radiosity (for example, it won't allow a radiosity
trace depth of greater than 2).

-Nathan

Nieminen Juha <war### [at] punarastascstutfi> wrote ...
> Bill DeWitt <the### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> : I think you are asking if a patched version will offer you
any -improvement-
> : in your images without you having to add to your scene file. If so, the
> : answer is no.
>
>   Radiosity might be an exception to this.
>
> --
> main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
> ):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Hi Nathan Kopp, you recently wrote in povray.windows:

> Unfortunately, Moray generally won't let you choose values that will give
> the best results for radiosity (for example, it won't allow a radiosity
> trace depth of greater than 2).
Hmmm, I usually take limits like that from the docs. If you have any
specific limits that are wrong I'd love to hear about them.
Unfortunately I hardly ever get to use Moray, so I really depend on
the feedback from users like that comment to correct it.

- Lutz
  email : lut### [at] stmuccom
  Web   : http://www.stmuc.com/moray

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 06 Dec 1999 15:37:27 GMT, Lutz Kretzschmar wrote:
>Hi Nathan Kopp, you recently wrote in povray.windows:
>
>> Unfortunately, Moray generally won't let you choose values that will give
>> the best results for radiosity (for example, it won't allow a radiosity
>> trace depth of greater than 2).
>Hmmm, I usually take limits like that from the docs. If you have any
>specific limits that are wrong I'd love to hear about them.
>Unfortunately I hardly ever get to use Moray, so I really depend on
>the feedback from users like that comment to correct it.

The point is that that is a documented limit of the official version, but
it's been relaxed in Nathan's version.

-- 
These are my opinions.  I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
The superpatch: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/superpatch/
My other stuff: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html

Post a reply to this message

Hi Ron Parker, you recently wrote in povray.windows:

> The point is that that is a documented limit of the official version, but
> it's been relaxed in Nathan's version.
Ooops, that server me right for not reading the whole thread.
Sorry<g>.

- Lutz
  email : lut### [at] stmuccom
  Web   : http://www.stmuc.com/moray

Post a reply to this message

Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
: The point is that that is a documented limit of the official version, but
: it's been relaxed in Nathan's version.

  AFAIK the limit of 2 recursion levels is set in the documentation but not
in povray. I think that you can specify values higher than 2 (and they will
affect the scene).
  I haven't tried it, though.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Juha <war### [at] punarastascstutfi> wrote ...
> Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
> : The point is that that is a documented limit of the official version,
but
> : it's been relaxed in Nathan's version.
>
>   AFAIK the limit of 2 recursion levels is set in the documentation but
not
> in povray. I think that you can specify values higher than 2 (and they
will
> affect the scene).
>   I haven't tried it, though.

You can set them higher but it has not affect on the scene.

-Nathan

Post a reply to this message