frank@morpheus.UUCP (Frank McPherson) (04/06/91)
--
I'm getting interested in using one of the freely distributable ray tracers
to (can you imagine this?) do some ray tracing. I'd like to get some
opinions from people who use both of these programs. Which is better?
Why do you think it's better?
Specific issues I want to know about:
Which one is faster?
Which one is easier to use?
Which one produces nicer-looking images?
If there are any other freely distributable ray tracers for the amiga which
I've missed, please inform me of my mistake.
Anyway, if you have anything to say about these things, send me some email
and I'll summarize in a few days.
Thanks,
-- Frank McPherson INTERNET: emcphers@fox.cs.vt.edu --dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca (Anarchy for Peace) (04/07/91)
In article <frank.3740@morpheus.UUCP> frank@morpheus.UUCP (Frank McPherson) writes: >-- >I'm getting interested in using one of the freely distributable ray tracers >to (can you imagine this?) do some ray tracing. I'd like to get some >opinions from people who use both of these programs. Which is better? >Why do you think it's better? between DKB and QRT, DKB is better because it does anti-aliasing, image-mapping and other neat stuff. QRT doesn't and also doesn't handle real complex textures >Specific issues I want to know about: > Which one is faster? QRT (stands for Quick Ray Tracer) > Which one is easier to use? Both about the same > Which one produces nicer-looking images? DKB > >If there are any other freely distributable ray tracers for the amiga which >I've missed, please inform me of my mistake. I have successfully ported Rayshade 3.0 and a beta version of Rayshade 4.0 I know, I've mentioned this before but for the following reasons, I'm not releasing the binaries. There are some bugs in the Lattice/SAS 68881 libraries and cones come up upside down because of this (works fine using the IEEE and lattice's own format). I'm going to release the binaries to comp.binaries in June when I get back from France, but the sources are going to be released to comp.sources.misc some time in the near future. I'm gonna wait until I have ported the Utah Raster toolkit (needed for image mapping) and have a GCC compiled math-co version. I have also (not quite successfully yet) ported VORT. Also in the works is the sipp polygon shading library. > >Anyway, if you have anything to say about these things, send me some email >and I'll summarize in a few days. > >Thanks, > >-- Frank McPherson INTERNET: emcphers@fox.cs.vt.edu -- -- Colin DeWolfe dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca
gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) (04/07/91)
In article <1991Apr6.230941.2585@cs.dal.ca> dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca (Anarchy for Peace) writes: >between DKB and QRT, DKB is better because it does anti-aliasing, image-mapping >and other neat stuff. QRT doesn't and also doesn't handle real complex textures The real question is: Has anybody ported PRT (Parallel Ray Tracer :)? >> Which one is faster? >QRT (stands for Quick Ray Tracer) Given a couple of machines, PRT will blow either of them away :) Personally, I'm very fond of both QRT and DKB. I am so glad that there are people out there that are using YACC/BISON/LEX/FLEX to produce better input languages to programs (something RayShade 3.0 was SERIOUSLY lacking in :). What I'd like to see is a parallel version of DKB. Hmmm... maybe if/when I get X11 going on the Amiga, we'll have a PD socket library, then we can use that for distributed processing... :) >-- >Colin DeWolfe >dewolfe@ug.cs.dal.ca Ralph Seguin gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu 536 South Forest Apt. #915 gilgalad@zip.eecs.umich.edu Ann Arbor, MI 48104 (313) 662-4805
frank@morpheus.UUCP (Frank McPherson) (04/08/91)
In article <1991Apr7.032659.23706@engin.umich.edu> gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) writes: > >The real question is: Has anybody ported PRT (Parallel Ray Tracer :)? > >Given a couple of machines, PRT will blow either of them away :) >Personally, I'm very fond of both QRT and DKB. I am so glad that there are >people out there that are using YACC/BISON/LEX/FLEX to produce better >input languages to programs (something RayShade 3.0 was SERIOUSLY lacking in :). >What I'd like to see is a parallel version of DKB. Hmmm... maybe if/when I >get X11 going on the Amiga, we'll have a PD socket library, then we can use >that for distributed processing... :) > >Ralph Seguin gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu -- How would the machines need to be connected to use PRT? You know, it's really beginning to look like we should come up with a FAQ-type list for people interested in this sort of things. FTP sites you can snag them from, etc. -- Frank McPherson INTERNET: emcphers@fox.cs.vt.edu --
bcorrie@csr (Brian Corrie) (04/09/91)
frank@morpheus.UUCP (Frank McPherson) writes: >In article <1991Apr7.032659.23706@engin.umich.edu> gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu (Ralph Seguin) writes: >> >>The real question is: Has anybody ported PRT (Parallel Ray Tracer :)? >> >>Given a couple of machines, PRT will blow either of them away :) >>Personally, I'm very fond of both QRT and DKB. I am so glad that there are >>people out there that are using YACC/BISON/LEX/FLEX to produce better >>input languages to programs (something RayShade 3.0 was SERIOUSLY lacking in :). >>What I'd like to see is a parallel version of DKB. Hmmm... maybe if/when I >>get X11 going on the Amiga, we'll have a PD socket library, then we can use >>that for distributed processing... :) >> >>Ralph Seguin gilgalad@caen.engin.umich.edu >-- >How would the machines need to be connected to use PRT? You know, it's >really beginning to look like we should come up with a FAQ-type list for >people interested in this sort of things. FTP sites you can snag them >from, etc. >-- Frank McPherson INTERNET: emcphers@fox.cs.vt.edu -- Check out the FAQ posting in comp.graphics. It has lots of ftp addresses where graphics specific code can be found. In particular, weedeater.math.yale.edu (130.132.23.17) has lots of great code, including some of the PD ray tracers. B -- Brian Corrie (bcorrie@csr.uvic.ca) Under the most rigorously controlled conditions of pressure, temperature, volume, humidity and other variables, the organism will do as it damn well pleases. Sounds like some of the code I have written...... 8-)
kholland@hydra.unm.edu (Kiernan Holland) (04/13/91)
Does anybody know where I can get Color and Black ribbons for my Toshiba 321SLC? (color printer, 3 in 1 model).
koren@hpfcdc.HP.COM (Steve Koren) (04/16/91)
> Given a couple of machines, PRT will blow either of them away :) > Personally, I'm very fond of both QRT and DKB. I am so glad that there are > people out there that are using YACC/BISON/LEX/FLEX to produce better > input languages to programs (something RayShade 3.0 was SERIOUSLY lacking QRT doesn't use yacc or lex. (I happen to know this 'cuz I wrote it :-) ) As for features, I think DKB wins hands down. QRT was OK back when I was working on it, but has since been passed up by pretty much everything else. Oh well :-) - steve PS - QRT will run significantly faster (over 2x) if you compile it with Lattice C, and much faster yet if you compile an '882 version.
kcampbel@uafhp.uark.edu (Keith Alan Campbell) (04/19/91)
See my posting in comp.sys.amiga.hardware. We are toying with the idea of creating a card with up to 4 DSP 56001 processors and the associated software to render images using the power of the 56001 and parallel processing. We will be doing some tests this summer to test the feasability of this combination. Don Kennedy Vision Quest Systems