Whats so good about POV Ray.
power brome
I don't get it. Why does so many people like PovRay?
Sure its free, thats a big plus, but its so hard to use and it renders
so slow, I had 4.0 installed on win95 and then realized you have to
learn the povray language achhh. No i am not a newbie who doesn't know
computer or program. I know Turbo Pascal and Qbasic, but coordinates,
and all those stuff you need to learn for PovRay, for me really takes
the fun out of 3D graphics making. thats my two cents.
Stuart Johnson
680,000 years ago, Nostradamus predicted that br...@ix.netcom.com would say...
Because it's very powerful and some people want to take the time to learn how
to do those amazing graphics. I'd much rather download POV3 and learn the scene
language than buy, say, 3D Studio and make worse-looking (imho) graphics. As
for rendering so slow, I don't see how that's valid - most graphics engines DO
render slowly, and I'm running a P166 and it's running great for scenes up to
the most complex demo scenes provided in... at MOST overnight in 1024x768
+a0.01. And how did you have 4.0 installed on Win95?
ark...@ibm.net
In <32584D...@ix.netcom.com>, power brome <br...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>I don't get it. Why does so many people like PovRay?
>Sure its free, thats a big plus, but its so hard to use and it renders
Well, I'll bite ... does anyone who uses commercial ray tracers find them easier
to use and quicker to finish. I'm truly curious ... esp. how much you had to pay
for the added convenience
John P. Beale
power brome <br...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
: I don't get it. Why does so many people like PovRay?
: learn the povray language achhh. No i am not a newbie who doesn't know
: computer or program. I know Turbo Pascal and Qbasic, but coordinates,
: and all those stuff you need to learn for PovRay, for me really takes
: the fun out of 3D graphics making. thats my two cents.
To each his own, I suppose. POVRay has been around for awhile, and has
picked up a following for a number of reasons. It is possible to do very
impressive graphics with it; but if it's not your style, by all means use
one of the other freeware, shareware, or commercial options. One nice
thing about POV for those who are tinker-ers and programmers, is that
source is available, as are many add-on features and utilities (such as,
dare I say it, landscape generators...). What I find most interesting
about graphics work is doing (or trying to do) something really new that
no canned program can... (tho this is getting harder as time goes by :-).
My $0.02.
regards,
john
-- John Beale --
be...@best.com
http://www.best.com/~beale/
Eric Schaefer
Slow? POV is a raytracer not a ?renderer? like 3ds. pics created with pov will
be much more accurate. Imagine and real3d are also raytracers and they are
not much quicker, are they? With povray , you can create some fx that are
really hard to do with 3d modellers.
Eric
p.s. hope this wasn't all wrong ;-)
--
/*****************************************
* Eric-Alexander Schaefer *
* esch...@rcs.urz.tu-dresden.de *
* http://rcs.urz.tu-dresden.de/~eschaefe *
* Have a good one! *
******************************************/
Shawn Fumo
>I don't get it. Why does so many people like PovRay?
>Sure its free, thats a big plus,
Well... I should think it's a big plus since anything comparable can be pretty
expensive..
>but its so hard to use
Well.. it's easier to use than it used to be, now that it's for windows
instead of just a command-line program. With the editor, it's more like using
one of the HTML editors...
>and it renders so slow,
Slow compared to what exactly? If you're trying to compare it to one of those
triangle shaded renderers, then of course it's going to be slower, since the
quality of a raytracer is a lot higher...
>I had 4.0 installed on win95 and
Do you mean version 3.0? 3.0 is the latest version...
>then realized you have to learn the povray language achhh.
Well, if this is something that really bothers you, then you should get one of
Povray's many modellers. They let you make the scene in wireframe, and some
let your render the scene directly from the modeller, which makes things about
as easy as one of the more expensive programs...
Just my 10 cents in..hehe =)
Shawn
Wayne Gordon
power brome wrote:
>
> I don't get it. Why does so many people like PovRay?
> so slow, I had 4.0 installed on win95 and then realized you have to
> learn the povray language achhh. No i am not a newbie who doesn't know
> computer or program. I know Turbo Pascal and Qbasic, but coordinates,
> and all those stuff you need to learn for PovRay, for me really takes
> the fun out of 3D graphics making. thats my two cents.
A BIG part of the aesthetic appeal of POV-as-software is that it's
freeware...I like it because I'm a tinkerer...and the ability to
actually "program" a scene is awesome...I didn't know I was more or
less learning C for awhile <grin>...I'd really love to see any future
versions have an even more powerful scene description language...
anyone can use a modeller...and there ARE quite a few for POV if
you don't want to lear to write POV scenes...
MY .02$
Wayne Gordon
OBTW - I hadn't even heard that v4.0 was out yet ;-p
Jafar
If the language is too hard to learn, download a modeller, like Breeze
Deisgner.
On Sun, 06 Oct 1996 20:25:30 -0400, power brome <br...@ix.netcom.com>
Christian Perle
power brome (br...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: I don't get it. Why does so many people like PovRay?
: Sure its free, thats a big plus, but its so hard to use and it renders
: so slow, I had 4.0 installed on win95 and then realized you have to
POV-Ray also doesn't render slow. It is a _raytracer_ not a
scanline renderer (like 3D Studio for example). A sphere in POV-Ray
isn't made of triangles, it is a mathematical exact object, just
specified by its center and radius. Render it in 5000x4000 and still
it will be perfectly round.
: learn the povray language achhh. No i am not a newbie who doesn't know
: computer or program. I know Turbo Pascal and Qbasic, but coordinates,
Then I don't understand why you dislike the scene description
language. IMHO it's much more powerful than a modeller.
BTW you are a newbie --- you don't know C ;-)
happy tracing,
Chris
--
Christian Perle E-mail: christi...@tu-clausthal.de
Am Galgensberg 4 WWW: http://www.tu-clausthal.de/~incp/
38678 Clausthal/Germany ComputerGuitarKitesBicyclesBeerPizzaRaytracing
Kerwin D Kanago
In <32584D...@ix.netcom.com> power brome <br...@ix.netcom.com>
writes:
>I don't get it. Why does so many people like PovRay?
I can certainly see that it isn't for everyone, but since you asked...
Well let's put it this way. I am an engineer and a programmer. All the
numbers and rotations and such feel real obvious to me. Having
programmed in like 18 different languages POVRay wasn't a lot of work
to learn.
However as far as my artistic talent goes... ZIP! Can't draw for
anything, can't play any instrument well, etc, etc, etc.
Getting POVRay however lets me do what I do best and end up with
something pretty astounding looking and even (dare I say it)...
artistic! and yes, I admit it; I am such a computer/engineering geek I
don't even try to use modelers! I just type the numbers in! It also
feels like I will never learn *everything* you can do with this tool.
Again my thanks to the POVRay team. Every time I do a picture with this
I feel like a kid who's mom let him get the box of 128 crayons with a
sharpener! You just know you could draw ANYTHING with all that and
can't imagine you could ever use all those colors but you just have to
try!
Ok so maybe I got a little carried away, but...
"That's just one mans opinion"
kk
G Sumner Hayes
in...@obelix.rz.tu-clausthal.de (Christian Perle) writes:
> POV-Ray also doesn't render slow. It is a _raytracer_ not a
> scanline renderer (like 3D Studio for example).
POV does render slowly. It certainly renders much better than 3D
studio, but it _is_ a raytracer and raytracers _do_ render slowly. If
you want to render quickly (at the cost of quality), use a scanline
renderer; if you want quality, use a radiosity/raytracing engine.
> : learn the povray language achhh. No i am not a newbie who doesn't know
> : computer or program. I know Turbo Pascal and Qbasic, but coordinates,
> Then I don't understand why you dislike the scene description
> language. IMHO it's much more powerful than a modeller.
> BTW you are a newbie --- you don't know C ;-)
You misspelled "PDP-10 assembly". Hope this helps.
TTFN,
Sumner
Ola Fosheim Grøstad
G Sumner Hayes wrote:
> in...@obelix.rz.tu-clausthal.de (Christian Perle) writes:
> > POV-Ray also doesn't render slow. It is a _raytracer_ not a
> > scanline renderer (like 3D Studio for example).
>
> POV does render slowly. It certainly renders much better than 3D
> studio, but it _is_ a raytracer and raytracers _do_ render slowly. If
> you want to render quickly (at the cost of quality), use a scanline
> renderer; if you want quality, use a radiosity/raytracing engine.
POV is a scanline renderer. It is reasonable fast when raytracing
though. It lacks some features and a bit in quality though, but compares
well to other freeware (like emacs and gcc). I just don't understand
why they don't have better triangle and mesh support. I think they
should at least provide the same basic features that OpenGL does. Think
about it. Use OpenGL (even inventor or vrml) for modelling and POV for
final rendering.
Another topic: I am looking for a renderer that supports z-buffer output
and normal output. (I'd like to get shinyness output as well)
--
Ola Fosheim Groestad, Oslo, Norway ( http://www.ifi.uio.no/~olag/ )
Ola Fosheim Grøstad
Ola Fosheim Gr=F8stad wrote:
> POV is a scanline renderer. It is reasonable fast when raytracing
> though. It lacks some features and a bit in quality though, but
Ugh. To prevent flames. I consider POV to be a scanline renderer because
that is the rendering order, but that is of course not meaningful as
most non-realtime renderers do that. The scanline-algorithm usually
refers to an algorithm that manages a list of (polygon) edges for each
scanline. I guess the vistabuffer does not qualify for that. Anyway, by
turning off rendering features that cause recursion you'll get a decent
speed, though not as fast as an optimized scanline-algorithm. Sorry for
the confusion.
Brad Clark
power brome wrote:
>
> I don't get it. Why does so many people like PovRay?
> so slow, I had 4.0 installed on win95 and then realized you have to
> computer or program. I know Turbo Pascal and Qbasic, but coordinates,
> the fun out of 3D graphics making. thats my two cents.
I think half of the fun is learning the language, and using it
to render a scene. Of course I use a modeler to place objects, but I
do find most of the fun in exploring the new features and possibilities
of the language unsupported in the modelers. My $.02 worth: I wouldn't
brag about knowing Turbo Pascal or Qbasic!
brad
Jonathan Feinberg
I love this newsgroup. Somebody posts a troll, and the result is a
series of thoughtful and funny responses. God bless c.g.r.t. *sniff*
--
Jonathan Feinberg j...@pobox.com Sunny Manhattan, NY
Peter Willems
in...@obelix.rz.tu-clausthal.de (Christian Perle) wrote:
lots snipped
>BTW you are a newbie --- you don't know C ;-)
>happy tracing,
> Chris
I'll agree with you on the newbe-thing but only because i think he is
a POV-newbe. Not programming in C doesn't make someone a newbe IMHO.
(not that i want to start a holy war over this)
I don't program in C but after 15 years of systems-development in
about a 20 or more computer-languages i don't consider myself as a
newbe !
Alltough i think BTW, that C is a very good language, TMO it's not
allways the "right tool for the job".
Peter Willems
E-Mail integrat...@tip.nl
-------------------------------------
Nothing can prepare you for the ULTIMATE bang on the head !
Shawn Fumo
> I think they should at least provide the same basic features that OpenGL does. Think
>about it. Use OpenGL (even inventor or vrml) for modelling and POV for
>final rendering.
I think you're missing a big point here. Povray doesn't have support for that
because they are letting the 3rd party modellers do that. One of the reasons
why I like povray is that it doesn't have the modeller hard-wired into the
renderer. It might be a little bit harder to get going, but it more than makes
up for it, since if you don't like the interface of one modeller, you can use
another one. I believe PovLab, Lace3D, and a couple of the other modellers use
OpenGL, Z-buffering, and similar technologies to preview your scene. There are
also a couple for DOS like Moray, MNM, etc. that show you just wireframe. Most
of the good ones also let you run the raytracer from inside the modeller, thus
making things pretty easy...
Oh, and povray is NOT a scanline renderer. A scanline renderer, is just one
that assigns one texture to a group of polygons. An example of this
is 3D Studio. Raytracing on the other hand, actually considers objects to be
made up of real base objects that don't look worse if you zoom in closer to
them. It follows light rays, and produces images based on where they go. It
also uses "real" texturing instead of just wrapping bitmaps around the
objects. That's the standard definition anyways.
If you consider a scanline renderer one that outputs the image pixil by pixil
starting from the top left corner, then what renderer ISN'T one??? Even
realtime renderers do that, just so fast that it doesn't look like they do...
Shawn
Christian Perle
Ola Fosheim =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gr=F8stad?= (ol...@ifi.uio.no) wrote:
: should at least provide the same basic features that OpenGL does. Think
: about it. Use OpenGL (even inventor or vrml) for modelling and POV for
: final rendering.
can be used in CSG. Triangle meshes are always inaccurate.
bye,
Ola Fosheim Grøstad
Shawn Fumo wrote:
> I think you're missing a big point here. Povray doesn't have support for that
> because they are letting the 3rd party modellers do that. One of the reasons
HUH???
OpenGL is a lowlevel graphics API. I want POVRAY to support the same
primitives like the colourinterpolated triangles (colour indicated by
vertices). If POVRAY supports these please let me know! If a modeller
enables this kind of functionality in POVRAY, please let me know.
Uhmm... sorry for shouting.
> I believe PovLab, Lace3D, and a couple of the other modellers use
> OpenGL, Z-buffering, and similar technologies to preview your scene.
Do they output Z-buffer information? I need a pixel by pixle match of
the image generated by povray and the z-buffer provided with the said
modeller.
> also a couple for DOS like Moray, MNM, etc. that show you just wireframe. Most
> of the good ones also let you run the raytracer from inside the modeller, thus
> making things pretty easy...
But I don't want a damn modeller (at this point), I use my own
generators.
> Oh, and povray is NOT a scanline renderer. A scanline renderer, is just one
> that assigns one texture to a group of polygons.
So, if I render by using painters algorithm it is scanline? I think not.
Textures has nothing to do with it whatsoever.
> That's the standard definition anyways.
Let's say that is the userdefinition. Anyway I cleared that up in
another post, trying to avoid this type of misunderstanding. The
scanline-ALGORITHM is somehow based on scanline rendring using an
EDGELIST.
> If you consider a scanline renderer one that outputs the image pixil by pixil
> starting from the top left corner, then what renderer ISN'T one??? Even
> realtime renderers do that, just so fast that it doesn't look like they do...
Wrong. Some do. Some don't. Like some SGI's, you know.. Scanline
rendring and z-buffer.. What's the point?
Okokok, I'm sorry for shouting, I'm sure you meant well, it's late,
forgive me.
Carl Perkins
ol...@ifi.uio.no writes...
}Shawn Fumo wrote:
}> I think you're missing a big point here. Povray doesn't have support for that
}> because they are letting the 3rd party modellers do that. One of the reasons
}
}primitives like the colourinterpolated triangles (colour indicated by
}vertices). If POVRAY supports these please let me know! If a modeller
It does not have that specific texturing option, although with clever use
of the existing options you may be ablt to fake it somewhat.
POV also has many primatives that OpenGL deos not have.
}> I believe PovLab, Lace3D, and a couple of the other modellers use
}> OpenGL, Z-buffering, and similar technologies to preview your scene.
}
}Do they output Z-buffer information? I need a pixel by pixle match of
}the image generated by povray and the z-buffer provided with the said
}modeller.
}Ola Fosheim Groestad, Oslo, Norway ( http://www.ifi.uio.no/~olag/ )
I belevie there was a patch for POV 2.2 to output the distance info rather
than the image. You might look for that (of course, it doesn't have the
3.0 features).
Of course, there is the question of "what z-buffer value is used if the
ray hits a fully or partially transparent object"? Do you use the value
of the distance to the first object or the last object a ray hits?
--- Carl
Ola Fosheim Grøstad
Christian Perle wrote:
>
> Ola Fosheim =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gr=F8stad?= (ol...@ifi.uio.no) wrote:
> : should at least provide the same basic features that OpenGL does. Think
> : about it. Use OpenGL (even inventor or vrml) for modelling and POV for
> : final rendering.
> I don't use meshes and modellers at all. I want solid objects that
> can be used in CSG. Triangle meshes are always inaccurate.
I'm sure we all want that, if they are flexible enough. Trianglemeshes
do at least provide the flexibility. I was asking for the meshes because
I can then use OpenGL for previews and roll your own dedicated
parameterized modeller.
--
KochinC
>I don't get it. Why does so many people like PovRay?
>Sure its free, thats a big plus, but its so hard to use and it renders
>so slow, I had 4.0 installed on win95 and then realized you have to
>learn the povray language achhh. No i am not a newbie who doesn't know
>computer or program. I know Turbo Pascal and Qbasic, but coordinates,
>and all those stuff you need to learn for PovRay, for me really takes
>the fun out of 3D graphics making. thats my two cents.
One great thing about POV-Ray is its source code is available for you to
tinker with. For instance, the official POV-Ray v3.0 text object can't
handle double-byte characters, yet I want to render some Chinese
characters in a scene. So I just took the source code and changed some
codes here and there. Now my own compile of POV-Ray v3.0 has one more
option that let me to enable the ability of rendering doube-byte
characters in text objects.
I also compiled an OS/2 version of POV-Ray v3.0 for myself from MS-DOS
version's source code. It now has (almost) the same look and feel as the
MS-DOS version except I haven't work out the image display part yet.
See if you can do those for a commercial rendering software. ;-)
Kochin Chang
-----------------
Koc...@aol.com
koc...@slinky.cs.nyu.edu
Thomas Farrell
power brome (br...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: I don't get it. Why does so many people like PovRay?
: Sure its free, thats a big plus, but
But nothing. I can't afford a commercial rendering package. Period. End
of discussion. It's POVRAY or nothing for me, and frankly given that
choice I'll choose povray. It's not hard to like something when it does
the job and it's your only choice.
: its so hard to use and it renders
: so slow, I had 4.0 installed on win95
A real feat, considering that POVRAY 4.0 hasn't been written yet...
: and then realized you have to
: learn the povray language achhh. No i am not a newbie who doesn't know
: computer or program. I know Turbo Pascal and Qbasic, but coordinates,
: and all those stuff you need to learn for PovRay, for me really takes
: the fun out of 3D graphics making. thats my two cents.
Fine. Then don't use it, but I really wonder who you think you are that
we're supposed to be so impressed with you that we care that you don't
like it. If you can't even use 3 dimensional cartesian coordinates,
well, I'm very unimpressed.
I installed POVRAY 2 on a DOS box a year ago - 20 minutes later I'd
rendered something. 2 days later I'd designed a number of large objects
that I've received quite a bit of praise for. Certainly usability wasn't
a problem for me.
TMF