Re: [grt-talk] Some suggestions.

[Simon Adameit]

Anton N. Mescheryakov wrote:
> >
> Environmental mapping is quite useful for raytracing, too. First of all, 
> it's a good way to cache rendering data. Render some static environment 
> of chrome object once and use it as you heart desires. Next, it's useful 
> then you CAN'T render environment but you've to render some 
> reflections/refractions or so.

Environmaental mapping might be useful but it's just like the reflection 
of a sky sphere, so there has to be some more general way to archieve this.

> OK,  we've come to some interesting point there. Do you mean grt as, 
> say, Lisp povray clone, or bias it towards real production? In the 1st 
> case, our aim is robust, mathematicaly correct program that create nice 
> pictures like chrome torus knot over checker plane; on other side are 
> programs like Lightwave, Maya, RenderMan systems and so on which stress 
> _visual_quality_. 

I dont see how the programms you mention stress _visual_quality_ in most 
cases the images I have seen done with these weren't in any way better 
than images done with povray. To the contrary IMO images produced with 
povray are more photorealistic than these. Also the programms you 
mention all ain't raytracers, not their rendering engine is superior but 
their workflow.

> POVRay is a pain in many places than it comes to  
> photorealistic matters. 

How?

> Of course, grt is fairly far away from both 
> sides, but questions like "why environment mapping" give me a clue that 
> the course is plotted to the first case - and here isn't anything wrong 
> about it. But I've seen some hype about "image synthesis system" so now 
> I'm a bit confuced...

I cant speak for anyone elso but what I want is a superior rendering 
engine like POV-Ray with cool shaders like RenderMan and perhaps a gui 
wich combines the strengths of editing scenes with a text editor and 
modelling with the mouse and all that written in lisp ;-)