 | | Rendering implementation details
|
|
I was envisioning how an LDraw renderer would be implemented if it were done with OpenGL, and I've arrived at some questions that I can't answer for myself. I'm particularly wondering about line type #5, the optional line. According to the LDraw (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Experimenting with camera.dat and look_at.dat [DAT]
|
|
(...) I updated the camera.dat and look_at.dat so they don't need to be REMmed out: 0 ~Camera Position 0 Name: Camera.dat 0 Author: Tore Eriksson 0 Un-official part 2 24 -4 0 0 4 0 0 2 24 0 -4 0 0 4 0 2 24 0 0 -4 0 0 4 0 L3P IFNOTPOV 1 0 0 25 37 1 0 (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Experimenting with camera.dat and look_at.dat
|
|
(...) Yes,I am very well aware of the multitude of camera settings POV offers, and I haven't yet decided which way to go. The fastest way may be to run my own race using my own META statements: 0 LDA CAMERA.POSITION x y z 0 LDA CAMERA.LOOKAT x y z 0 (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Cross platform GUI
|
|
Personally I don't think using GTK under Windows is a good idea. I've worked with it before and even released an application that used it and you won't believe the amount of people that have trouble using a Windows application with controls that (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Experimenting with camera.dat and look_at.dat
|
|
(...) POV-Ray cameras can do alot. Besides just having a location and direction, you can have a zoom, focus, you can specify the direction in the form of "look at", and more. If you are going to have a camera.dat, you might consider having it be (...) (20 years ago, 24-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Experimenting with camera.dat and look_at.dat [DAT]
|
|
I created these three files and ran them through L3P: - - - - - 0 Test 0 Name: test000.ldr 0 Author: Tore Eriksson 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 -1 0 1 0 1 0 0 700.dat 1 15 0 -24 100 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3001.dat 1 4 0 -48 100 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3001.dat 1 15 0 -72 100 (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) I'm sorry if I was unclear. Earlier in the thread I put forward Bens wheels as an example and continued that example here. I realise they would not be eligible for inclusion in the official Ldraw library, and would not submit them. This thread (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) Maybe I'm missing the point here, but if this whole discussion is about Ben's excellent independently produced wheels, then whether or not they are modelled appropriately for inclusion in the official LDraw library is academic. The official (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) (I'm going to try not to sound like a jilted lover here, bear with me) If you're not already a parts author, you have to ask for permission to submit a part to the Parts Tracker. I've been told translated-from-other-CAD (i.e. messy) parts (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) No DAT part can provide a perfect render without using some substitutions - flat polygons just can't do perfect curved surfaces. But that's another issue. I have recently finished re-authoring Ben's wheels (URL) (waiting for his OK before I (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) I should probably find then for what is LDraw library aimed at. If it's something like as perfect as possible renders or some quick mockup prototyping. (...) Wouldn't it be possible to be the parts as accurate as possible and then (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Cross platform GUI
|
|
Well I'm kind of of pissed. ** begin rant ** Curious to find an acceptible substitute for Java, I was looking into cross platform GUI toolkits. GTK+ came to mind but alas no Mac support for the latest version. Then I thought of Qt. I visited the Qt (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) Well, rendering time gets affected too, right? It's harder to build a model if it takes MLCad 20 seconds to redraw once... Oh, you mean for the rendering in POV when doing the animation? Well, file loading time, memory consumption, etc. etc. (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: l3p as open source
|
|
(...) A nice thing about open source would be that it would be possible for other people to work on ports to different architectures other than the microsoft-based platform. While emulators may exist to allow people to get by for the time being, (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) If for nothing else, to permit them to be used as the basis for the manual creation of similar parts, and abstraction into resuable sub-components. Not a strong reason, but worth considering. (...) To use just one example - the STUD primitive (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) Yes, since it is text based. Also, a most new authors learn by examining the code. (...) Unneccessary memory usage and file size. (...) L3P (and other converters/viewers) detect these primitives and convert them to smooth objects (e.g. L3P (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: l3p as open source (was: Re: Anatomy of a POV file (e.g. L3P suggestions))
|
|
(...) Why don't you create your main scene file that never changes and then just include the l3p output file into your scene file. I believe Lars is working on options that leave out the povray code that is required to be in the main file (like (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts editing made easy, anyone?
|
|
(...) Why? Is the .DAT file supposed to be readable by humans? Why? ;) What's wrong with the larger number of polygons? What positives (from the side of the automated rendering process) does bring the existence of primitives? What's wrong with the (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: l3p as open source (was: Re: Anatomy of a POV file (e.g. L3P suggestions))
|
|
(...) Hi Kevin Thanks for your tip, but even though it seems to solve the amb/dif/reflection-problem, it unfortunately doesn't cover the need for special pov-ray objects like special lights, fog etc, as it's also based on L3p. Another thing I just (...) (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: l3p as open source (was: Re: Anatomy of a POV file (e.g. L3P suggestions))
|
|
(...) An alternative to open source is to post process l3p output to change things the way you want. This is what I do in LPub. L3P output is simple text and extremely consistant, making it easy to modfiy the contents. Kevin (20 years ago, 22-Jan-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
