POV-Ray

The Persistence of Vision Raytracer (POV-Ray).

This is the legacy Bug Tracking System for the POV-Ray project. Bugs listed here are being migrated to our github issue tracker. Please refer to that for new reports or updates to existing ones on this system.

IDCategoryTask TypeReported InPriority  descSeveritySummaryStatusProgressDue In Version
246OtherPossible Bug3.70 RC6Very LowLowRegression on scale limit between 3.7 and previous rele...Tracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

From Thomas de Groot

Using the following code for a (sky) sphere in a scene, with light source well outside the sphere;
works correctly until the above scale value. Use a value of >=100*10e4 and the sphere becomes black.

#version 3.7;
global_settings{ assumed_gamma 1.0 }

#declare T_sky =
texture {
  pigment {
    gradient y
    pigment_map {
      [0.0 srgb <1.0,0.7,0.6>*1 transmit 0.5]
      [1.0 srgb <0.8,0.1,0.0>*1 transmit 0.5]
    }
  }
  finish {
    emission 0.9
    diffuse 0.0
  }
}

#declare T_cosmos =
texture {
  pigment {
    color rgbt <0,0,0,1>
  }
  finish {
    ambient 0.0
    diffuse 0.0
  }
}

sphere {
  <0,0,0>,1
  texture {T_sky}
  interior_texture {T_cosmos}
  no_shadow
  no_reflection
  inverse
  scale 99.9*10e4
}

Working with windows version of POV-Ray and Win7 x64

Is this normal for version 3.7 RC5? I seem to remember that with lower
versions of POV-Ray on could go at least to 10e6. Especially with the
Ringworld scenes back in 2010 the scales used where much larger without
any black out.

I can indeed confirm that the Ringworld scene does not render correctly anymore, with identical black out.

273OtherDefinite Bug3.70 RC6Very LowMediumNo automatic backup files from inc filesTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

If enabled, POVray always created backups of pov and inc files once per session.
Now using 3.7 RC6 only pov file backups are created but not from inc files.

301OtherDefinite Bug3.70 RC7Very LowLowFallback to default image size causes wrong values to b...Tracked on GitHub
50%
Task Description

When resolution is not specified (neither via POVRAY.INI nor via QUICKRES.INI nor via command line or custom .ini file), random values are displayed for image resolution in the Image Output Options message output. (The actual render will be performed at the default size of 160×120 pixels though.)

302OtherPossible Bug3.70 RC7Very LowLowconfusing error message when .ini file cannot be parsedTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

When a command-line parameter in an .ini file cannot be parsed (such as “+a.3”), POV-Ray reports a “Problem with setting”, quoting the command line, rather than indicating that the problem occurred in an .ini file. This leads the user to think that the problem is with the command line itself, unnecessarily confusing him.

321OtherDefinite Bug3.70 releaseVery LowLowbounding threshold inconsistencyTracked on GitHub
90%
Task Description

User reported documentation inconsistency. Investigation led to the discovery of a bug in the setting of the current default value.

~source/frontend/renderfrontend.cpp reports the value “3” while ~source/backend/scene/scene.cpp sets a default value of “1”

Before for addressing this issue, are there any thoughts as to what the default value should be?

326OtherDefinite Bug3.70 releaseVery LowLowrestricted setting ignored in 3.7Tracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

Due to a typo in the conf file parser (introduced, I think, in refactoring after 3.6), the restricted setting is ignored, and access checks aren’t performed.

Fixing this reveals some other issues:

  • %INSTALLDIR%/../../etc is incompletely canonicalized to /usr/local/share/../etc, not /usr/local/etc
  • read+write paths are added to the read list only, so writing is impossible

See attached patch.

Relatedly, I think it would be nice to add a new replacement token %CONFDIR% instead of %INSTALLDIR%/../../etc.

Also, there’s a realpath function that could simplify path handling, though I’m not sure if it’s available on all platforms.

118Light sourceFeature Request3.70 beta 37aVery LowLowMore efficient handling of fading lightsTracked on GitHub
0%
3.71 release Task Description

Currently, fading light sources are used for lighting and shadow
calculations even when so far away as to no longer have any effect
on the outcome. The proposed solution is to add a new keyword
fade_cutoff_distance which tells povray to ignore the light
source when alluminating a point at larger distance.

A sample implementation is provided in the attached files. These
changes are still based on beta 34 as sources for the current beta
are not yet available, and starting to merge changes to beta 35
only at this time didn’t seem worth the effort. Also, please
disregard, changes in the CVS header comments (I also use
CVS locally for managing source files).

Further considerations regarding this feature:

- For special effects this feature can also be used if the light
source does not actually use fading. On the other hand, cutting
the light at some distances can be considered an extreme form
of fading which may justify the keyword name anyhow.

- Depending on how  FS#46  is implemented, the test for cutoff may
then be needed at another location as well.

- The default value currently is 0 (or *no* cutoff distance). For
#version 3.7 of higher, the default could be chosen automatically
based on the light source intensity and adc_bailout, although it
may then need to be overriden by the user for extreme pigments.

177Light sourceFeature Request3.70 beta 39Very LowLowAdd support for conserve_energy to shadow computationsTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

The following scene gives a comparison of current conserve_energy handling in standard shadow computations vs. photons.

Note how the rather highly reflective slabs fail to cast shadows, except where the photons target sphere enforces computation of shadow brightness to be done by the photons algorithm.

For more realistic shadowing without the need to enable photons, I suggest do add proper conserve_energy handling to the shadow computation code (which shouldn’t be too much effort).

global_settings {
  max_trace_level 10
  photons { spacing 0.003 media 10 }
}

camera {
  right x*image_width/image_height
  location  <-2,2.6,-10>
  look_at   <0,0.75,0>
}

light_source {
  <500,300,150>
  color rgb 1.3
  photons {
    refraction on
    reflection on
  }
}

sky_sphere {
  pigment {
    gradient y
    color_map {
      [0.0 rgb <0.6,0.7,1.0>]
      [0.7 rgb <0.0,0.1,0.8>]
    }
  }
}

plane {
  y, 0
  texture { pigment { color rgb 0.7 } }
}

#declare M_Glass=
material {
  texture {
    pigment {rgbt 1}
    finish {
      ambient 0.0
      diffuse 0
      specular 0.2 // just to give a hint where the sphere is
    }
  }
  interior { ior 1.0 }
}

#declare M_PseudoGlass=
material {
  texture {
    pigment {rgbt 1}
    finish {
      ambient 0.0
      diffuse 0.5
      specular 0.6
      roughness 0.005
      reflection { 0.3, 1.0 fresnel on }
      conserve_energy
    }
  }
  interior { ior 1.5 }
}


sphere {
  <1.1,1,-1.3>, 1
  material { M_Glass }
  photons {
    target 1.0
    refraction on
    reflection on
  }
}

// behind target object
box {
  <-0.2,0,-2.3>, <0.0,4,0.3>
  material { M_PseudoGlass }
  rotate z*1 // just to better see the reflection of the horizon
}

// before target object
box {
  <2.4,0,-2.3>, <2.6,4,-0.3>
  material { M_PseudoGlass }
  photons { pass_through }
  rotate z*1 // just to better see the reflection of the horizon
}
275Light sourceDefinite Bug3.70 RC7Very LowLowcircular area lights exhibit anisotropyTracked on GitHub
50%
Future release Task Description

circular area lights exhibit some anisotropy, being brighter along the diagonals than on average, as can be demonstrated with the following scene:

//+w800 +h800
#version 3.7;
global_settings{assumed_gamma 1}
plane{-z,-10 pigment{rgb 1} finish{ambient 0 brilliance 0}}
disc{0,z,10000,0.5}
camera{orthographic location z look_at 10*z up y*12 right x*12}
light_source{-10*z rgb 10 area_light 10*x 10*y 257 257 adaptive 4 circular}
287Light sourceDefinite Bug3.70 RC7Very LowLowarea_illumination shadow calculationTracked on GitHub
50%
Future release Task Description

not sure if this is something needing further work or an intended effect.

Shadows from and area light with area_illumination on seem to follow the same shadow calculation as a standard area light by giving more weight to lights near the center of the array. I would assume the shadows would be calculated similarly to individual lights in the same pattern as the array by evenly distributing the amount of shadow equally for each light. But this is not what I see.

The code sample below when rendered with scene 1 will show shadows grouped near the center from the area light with area_illumination. If scene 1 is commented out and scene 2 is uncommented then rendered, you will see evenly distributed shadows from individual lights. Area lighting with area_illumination I would assume should give a result identical to scene 2. If scene 1 is rendered with area_illumination off, the shadow calculation is exactly the same as with area_illumination on.

example images rendered on win32 XP

#version 3.7;

global_settings {
 ambient_light 0
 assumed_gamma 1
}

camera {
  location <0, 3, -5>
  look_at <0, 2, 0>
}

background { rgb <.3, .5, .8> }
plane { y,0 pigment { rgb .7 } }
torus { 1.5,.1 rotate 90*x translate 4*z pigment { rgb .2 } }
plane { -z,-7 pigment { rgb .7 } }

/*
// scene 1
light_source{
  y
  1
  area_light 3*x, z, 7, 1
  area_illumination on
}
union {
 sphere { 0,.05 }
 sphere { .5*x,.05 }
 sphere { x,.05 }
 sphere { 1.5*x,.05 }
 sphere { -.5*x,.05 }
 sphere { -x,.05 }
 sphere { -1.5*x,.05 }
 translate y
  hollow pigment { rgbt 1 } interior { media { emission 10 } }
}
// end scene 1
*/


// scene 2
#declare Light = light_source {
  0
  1/7
  looks_like { sphere { 0,.05 hollow pigment { rgbt 1 } interior { media { emission 10 } } } }
}

union {
 object { Light }
 object { Light translate .5*x }
 object { Light translate x }
 object { Light translate 1.5*x }
 object { Light translate -.5*x }
 object { Light translate -x }
 object { Light translate -1.5*x }
 translate y
}
// end scene 2

289Light sourcePossible Bug3.70 RC7Very LowLowarea_illumination with light fading and scattering medi...Tracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

with reference to http://bugs.povray.org/task/46

still some issue with area illumination and light fading when interacting with media

seems light fade is not taken into account with scattering media.
emission and absorption media seem to work fine.
occurs with all scattering types.

#version 3.7;

global_settings {
 ambient_light 0
 assumed_gamma 1
}

camera {
  location <0, 3, -5>
  look_at <0, 2, 0>
}


#declare Light = 3; // light 1 = individual lights
                   // light 2 = standard area light
                   // light 3 = area light with area illumination

#declare Fade = 1; // light fading: 1 on, 0 off

#declare Media = 1; // media 1 = scattering
                    // media 2 = emission
                    // media 3 = absorption

#declare Type = 1; // scattering media type


#switch(Light)
 #case(1)

  #declare Ls = light_source {
    0
    1/7
    #if(Fade) fade_distance 2 fade_power 2 #end
  }

  union {
   object { Ls }
   object { Ls translate .5*x }
   object { Ls translate x }
   object { Ls translate 1.5*x }
   object { Ls translate -.5*x }
   object { Ls translate -x }
   object { Ls translate -1.5*x }
   translate y
  }

 #break
 #case(2)

  light_source{
    y
    1
    area_light 3*x, z, 7, 1
    #if(Fade) fade_distance 2 fade_power 2 #end
  }

 #break
 #case(3)

  light_source{
    y
    1
    area_light 3*x, z, 7, 1
    #if(Fade) fade_distance 2 fade_power 2 #end
    area_illumination on
  }

 #break

#end


cylinder { <0, .01, 0>, <0, 5, 0>, 2 pigment { rgbt 1 } hollow no_shadow
 interior {
  media {
   #if(Media = 1) scattering {Type, 30 } #end
   #if(Media = 2) emission 2 #end
   #if(Media = 3) absorption 2 #end
    density { cylindrical turbulence 1.5 scale <1, .14, 1> }
  }
 }
 scale <.15, 1, .4> translate 4*z
}

plane { y,0 pigment { rgb .7 } }
plane { -z,-7 pigment { gradient y color_map { [.5 rgb 1][.5 rgb 0] } } }
union {
 sphere { 0,.05 }
 sphere { .5*x,.05 }
 sphere { x,.05 }
 sphere { 1.5*x,.05 }
 sphere { -.5*x,.05 }
 sphere { -x,.05 }
 sphere { -1.5*x,.05 }
 translate y
  hollow pigment { rgbt 1 } interior { media { emission 10 } }
}
172Image formatUnimp. Feature/TODO3.70 beta 39Very LowLowRe-implement progressive image outputTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

With previous versions of POV-Ray, it was possible to turn off display output, but still assess the output during render by viewing the output file as it was progressively generated. This allowed e.g. to run a long render on a remote machine as a background process, and check the output from time to time via FTP or similar.

229Image formatFeature Request3.70 RC3Very LowLowClock value into EXIF data for PNGTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

The best time for a picture....

I set the day time and so the position of the sun by “clock=”

Normal I document my source very good, but this time,
I forgot the clock seting for the picture of my book cover.

So I would find it very practicall to put the clock value
and other setings for rendering
into EXIF data of the picture.

26Geometric PrimitivesDefinite Bug3.61Very LowLowArtifacts rendering a cloth which has two-side texturesTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

Dear PovRay maintainers and developers, congratulations for your great RayTracer!

We think that we have found a bug while we were rendering a piece of cloth.

In this piece of cloth were defined two textures, one for one side and one for the another side:

  texture { mesh_tex0_0 }
  interior_texture { mesh_tex0_1 }
  • Please: Look at line 77414 of the attached file “test.pov” to see

these definitions in their original context.

We have found some artifacts in the final rendering, in concrete near some wrinkles,
please, look at the attached file “render_artifacts.tga”, I have painted a big green arrow
near the artifacts, maybe you’ll need to do a zoom to see them more accurately.

They are as though the texture of the other side was painted in the incorrect side.

Fortunately, we have a patch to fix this bug (thanks to Denis Steinemann, he made the
implementation for PovRay 3.5, so I have adapted these changes to release 3.6.1)

Although we have found this bug in the Windows and Linux 3.6.1 releases,
the patch was generated in Linux (using the source code release of “povray-3.6.1”).

To apply this patch, inside the parent folder of the directory “povray-3.6.1” execute:

            patch -p0 < other_side_artifacts.patch

And the “povray-3.6.1” will be patched and you will get a console output like this:

 patching file povray-3.6.1/source/lighting.cpp
 patching file povray-3.6.1/source/mesh.cpp
 patching file povray-3.6.1/source/render.cpp

We don’t know if this “hack” is enough smart to apply in the next release,
but we think that it fixes the bug (the artifacts dissapear).

Best regards and thank you very much for your great RayTracer!

60Geometric PrimitivesDefinite Bug3.70 beta 34Very LowMediumArtifacts using prism in CSGTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

Using prisms in intersecion or difference CSG objects may cause artifacts in POV-Ray 3.6.2 as well as 3.7.0.beta.34, as demonstrated by the following code:


camera {
  right    -x
  up        y*image_height/image_width
  location  <-24,19,12>
  look_at   <0,0,0>
}

light_source { <100,200,100> color rgb 1 }

plane { y, -2 pigment { color rgb 1 } }


#declare KeyValue = 1.366; // pick any you like

difference {
  prism {
    linear_sweep -0.5,0.5, 4
    
    <-3,20-17>,
    <-3,KeyValue>,
    <-6,-3>,
    <-0,-5>
  }
  intersection {
    cylinder { <-7,-0.51,1>, <-7, 0.51,1>, 4.0 }
    plane { z, KeyValue }
  }
  pigment { color rgb 0.5 } 
}

Apparently the surface of the other object becomes visible when it exactly coincides with a vertex of the prism; probably there is a failure of the inside() test for such values.

75Geometric PrimitivesUnimp. Feature/TODO3.70 beta 34Very LowMediumReplace POV_MALLOC with std::vector in shape codeTracked on GitHub
30%
Future release Task Description

In the files bezier.cpp, fpmetric.cpp, fractal.cpp, hfield.cpp, isosurf.cpp, lathe.cpp, poly.cpp, polygon.cpp, prism.cpp, sor.cpp, and sphsweep.cpp the use of POV_MALLOC can be replaced by std::vector quite easily because the containing class already is a C++ class. As this is a low hanging fruit for continued code cleanup, it should be done sooner rather than later.

81Geometric PrimitivesDefinite Bug3.62Very LowMediumsphere_sweep generating artifactsTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

I’m running POV-Ray for (64 bit) Windows v3.62 on (64 bit) Windows Vista

This pov file:


#include "colors.inc"
#include "metals.inc"

light_source { <6, 9, -21> color White }
camera { location <0, 0, -3> look_at <0, 0, 0> }

sphere_sweep {
                cubic_spline
                6
                <-2.0, 0, 0> 0.05

                <0.000,0,0> 0.2
                <0.025,0,0> 0.2
                <0.050,0,0> 0.2
                <0.075,0,0> 0.2

                <3.0,0,0> 0.2
                pigment { color White }
}

Produces two strange artifacts: A disk at the center of the sweep, and a faint “halo” or veil which shows as 4 faint hyperbolas centered around the origin.

I have tried tweaking tolerance (for no other reason than I saw that someone else was tweaking it to solve a problem) but this does not seem to change things.

For a look at MY result when I run this, view this image:

riventree.comarchivebugdatapovrayspheresweepartifacts.jpg

Alain reports the same behavior in the latest version: “It’s still there with the latest version: 3.7 beta 35a.” This MAY move the status to “confirmed”, but I can’t do that

Someone else says that changing the scale (!) “solves” the problem by moving the disk and the halo offscreen, but that sounds like a bad idea to me.

-Jeff Evarts, first-time POVRay bug reporter

202Geometric PrimitivesDefinite Bug3.70 RC3Very LowLowNumerical oddities in Julia_FractalTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

I understand that some things have changed in the way certain computations in POV-Ray decide when something is “good enough” and I think this is biting me in Julia_Fractal (where, of course, the highest-resolution computations are needed).

The bug has been posted here:

http://news.povray.org/povray.bugreports/thread/%3Cweb.4dbf2e26b56a53c15b4449250%40news.povray.org%3E/

Including a short .pov file and instructions that reproduce it.

(It pops up in other configurations and view angles as well, but this one captures in in a way that makes it clear it’s a bug: the distance of the camera from the origin appears to change the shape of the rendered object).

This appeared first on a Windows Server 2003 machine, it is apparently confirmable on at least one other system as per that thread.

222Geometric PrimitivesDefinite Bug3.70 RC3Very LowLowincorrect render of CSG merge with radiosityTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

The problem arises when I am trying to trace a radiosity scene without conventional lighting that has a GSG merge object. There are a coincident surfaces, but these surfaces are first merged, then the texture applied. The texture is a simple solig color non-transfluent pigment, default normal, default finish etc..

Problem consists when adding antialiasing, changing resolution, changing camera view-point etc.; when I replace merge with union, the problem disappeared.

The scene was checked on two different machines with different versions of POV-Ray:

  1. Gentoo Linux, kernel 2.6.39-r3, i686 Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz GenuineIntel, 2G RAM (this is Dell PowerEdge 2650 server with 2 dual-core Intel Xeon MP processors); Persistence of Vision™ Ray Tracer Version 3.7.0.RC3 (i686-pc-linux-gnu-g++ 4.5.3 @ i686-pc-linux-gnu)
  2. Gentoo Linux, kernel 2.6.37-r4, x86_64 AMD Athlon™ X2 Dual Core Processor BE-2350, 2G RAM (non-branded machine); Persistence of Vision™ Ray Tracer Version 3.6.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ 4.4.4 @ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)

(scene has been adapted slightly to be rendered with 3.6, the adaptation was to change “emission” with “ambient” and replace gamma “srgb” with “2.2”)

Both machines generate similar images.

The attachment is an archive containing sources of minimal scenes with these problems, and sample pictures I generated from them on my machines.

226Geometric PrimitivesPossible Bug3.70 RC3Very LowLowNear-coincident surface accuracyTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

This is a transparent box very close to a plane.

box {
    -1, 1
    pigment { rgbf <0, 0, 1, 1> }
}

plane {
    #if (version < 3.7)
        y, -1.0000007
    #else
        y, -1.00007
    #end
    pigment { rgb 1 }
    finish { ambient 1 }
}

camera {
    location <1, 2, 3>
    look_at 0
}

The box is placed 100 times closer to the plane for 3.6, but both 3.6 and 3.7 produce exactly the same black artifact (attached).

So apparently 3.7 is less accurate. (And the exact factor 100 feels suspicious.)

240Geometric PrimitivesFeature Request3.70 RC3Very LowLowObject for efficient automatic periodic pavementTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

Whenever some object is to be periodically repeated in some kind of grid, you can achieve this with macros, but it
a) wastes a lot of resources

 even if object references are implemented in the future, wrapper with its own transformation matrix still takes space and bookkeeping

b) is not infinite

 annoying when making infinite planar tiling with arbitrary objects
 like an approximate water surface or tiling with real bricks
 or anything that needs to extend to horizon

c) is not optimized for periodicity

I think it can be very efficiently implemented as an object that takes a finite object argument (like CSG functions) and can be periodic in either 1D,2D or (possibly dangeorous?) 3D with specified period. In each dimension, the number of repetitions can be any integer or even infinity (or max_int). Something like
periodicity <2,2,Infinity> 2 copies in 1 direction, 2 in the other, infinite in the third
grid_separation <1,2,2>
1 unit size in first direction, 2 unit sizes in the other two

All the code needs to do is raytrace in the current unit cell and if the ray passes uninterrupted, pass it through the neighbouring unit cell (which means trace a translated ray through the same object). The object itself would just feel an additional clipping box, everything else would work seamlessly.

In case of infinite column of transparent object, max_trace stops the infinite loop anyway.

This is just a suggestion, I realize this is more of a long-term change but it is quite easy to implement and would simplify a large number of projects.

288Geometric PrimitivesPossible Bug3.70 RC7Very LowLowTolerance problem with refraction in blobs in CSG inter...Tracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

If a blob is intersected by something else, the composite object has incorrect refractions if it is too small (in absolute units). Having the same object constructed without a blob, the errors happen at much smaller scales. The errors don’t affect solid objects, just refractions.

An example shows a half-sphere, constructed as CSG sphere + plane, and identical half-pshere, constructed as CSG blob + plane. When the scale of the entire construction is changed, the refractions disappear first for the blob, and at 100x times smaller scale, also for the sphere. The right side shows the solid version, showing that the surface intersection test is ok, it’s just the refraction that fails.

The problem is not present when looking from the curved side (the blob side). So the ray that hits the blob, gets refracted correctly, but the ray that hits the intersecting plane first, and should then refract in the blob from the inside, doesn’t work. If in attached sphere, you exchange -y with y in clipping planes, everything is ok.

The scale when this happens is not very small - blobs of radius 0.02 already fail (noticed because in 1=1metre scale, blob raindrops on a glass plate didn’t have intersections when looking from the back).

Examples are named by factor=9,0.9,0.09,0.009 and you can see first the blob (top) refraction gets smaller and disappears, then later the bottom (sphere) also gets the same problem.

292Geometric PrimitivesUnimp. Feature/TODO3.70 RC7Very LowLowArbitrary containing object for isosurfacesTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

A low priority thought for the future: isosurface now only allows contained_by to be a sphere or a box. It would be more intuitive to allow the same objects that are allowed in clipped_by and bounded_by (although it probably needs to be finite). It would enable allow much faster rendering in many cases:

1) There are a lot of cases when the sphere or a box are very bad in bounding - if an object has a hole, a torus may be better, and in many cases, cylindrical bounding would help a lot.
2) Sometimes, having a too large contained_by object includes far-away parts of the iso-function, and expose large gradients that you want to avoid. If a bounding object is better, you can decrease the max_gradient and speed up the render.
3) The isosurface is usually much more expensive to calculate than any normal bounding object, so it’s an improvement even if the intesection test is not as fast as bounding box.
4) A typical case: if you use texture-like functions to make the surface realistically rough, you know almost exactly what the bounding object is - it can be the original unmodified object.
5) For isosurface terrains, a preprocessing macro could create a rough mesh-like bounding object to contain the “mountains”, thus making everything faster.
6) In case you want clipping, having the contained_by set to the same object probably avoits calculating too many intersections.

The main modification is probably that the intersections of bounding objects can be split into more than one interval - but it’s probably worth it, the isosurfaces are usually a speed bottleneck.

324Geometric PrimitivesDefinite Bug3.70 releaseVery LowHigh3.7 mesh2 rendering artifact, regression from 3.6Tracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

Povray 3.7 has rendering artifact in meshes with polygons that meet at shallow angles. Please see the attached file.

The part of concern is the mesh2, which produces the partly-transparent faces of a shallow pyramid. The file result-3_6.png shows the output of povray-3.6, and the file result-3_7.png shows the output of povray-3.7. In 3.7, you can see a thin light-colored margin all around the base of the pyramid, especially thick under the top cylinder. In 3.6, this artifact is absent. For comparison purposes, I have inserted a “#version 3.6;” directive at the top of the file so that the output images are as close to each other as possible. However, the artifact is still present in 3.7 without this directive.

The attached scene file is only a small part of a much larger scene, where this artifact shows up in numerous very obvious places, where it doesn’t in 3.6. I have hunted in the documentation and online for ways to solve this problem, but haven’t found anything. Because of this, I am forced to stay with 3.6 for production use, which is quite unfortunate since I’d like to take advantage of the new features of 3.7.

28FrontendFeature Request3.70 beta 32Very LowLow#debug message not displayed.Tracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

The #debug message stream is only being flushed when it hits a newline character,
instead of after each #debug statement. This means that some final strings don’t show up.

#debug "This line prints,\n but this line doesn't."
310EditorFeature Request3.70 RC7Very LowLowEditor should remember bookmarksTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

Now the editor remembers only the cursor positions of the loaded files when starting a new PR session. It would be more friendly to remember whether the window was split or not, as well as the bookmarks.

205DocumentationUnimp. Feature/TODO3.70 RC3Very LowLowSyntax documentation uses inconsistent notationTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

The syntax notation used in the main documentation is different than that used in the quick-reference section. This should be changed for consistency, using the superior quick-reference notation throughout.

106DistributionUnimp. Feature/TODO3.70 beta 37Very LowLowUpdate sample scenes and include files for POV-Ray 3.7 ...Tracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

Most sample scenes and include files were designed at times when POV-Ray did not to any proper gamma handling, or still used the inferior 3.6 “assumed_gamma” mechanism.

All the scenes and include files should be reviewed, and updated to fit the new 3.7 gamma model.

The primary task will probably be gamma-adjusting literal color values and ambient parameters; I suggest using macros (which ideally should be defined in an include file) to be set according to the #version statement, so the scene/include file could be kept compatible with older versions.

181BackendUnimp. Feature/TODO3.70 beta 40Very LowMediumUnimplemented, altered or missing features to document ...Tracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

This is a list of unimplemented features and things to fix with respect to 3.7 vs 3.6 compatibility. They either need to be fixed in code, or failing that, to be documented prior to release.


Create_INI works differently from 3.6. Prior versions of POV-Ray would write all options to the file, even if they were not supplied by the user (non-supplied options would take the default value). Currently in 3.7, only supplied options are written, because the front-end does not send unused options to the back-end. The proper fix for this would be to have a set of defines that establish the defaults all in one place (currently we rely on hard-coded values scattered around the code), and for the Output_INI_Option() function to look up and use the default when not supplied. As this is not likely to be done before 3.7 release, we need to document it as a temporary situation.

The following messages are marked as ‘currently not supported by code’ in povmsgid.h. We need to check where this comment is correct and if so the docs need to be updated to indicate this (for items that are already documented). Some items may be re-implemented later, and some may never be:

  • kPOVAttrib_TestAbort
  • kPOVAttrib_TestAbortCount
  • kPOVAttrib_VideoMode
  • kPOVAttrib_Palette
  • kPOVAttrib_DisplayGammaType
  • kPOVAttrib_FieldRender
  • kPOVAttrib_OddField
  • kPOVAttrib_AntialiasGammaType
  • kPOVAttrib_LightBuffer
  • kPOVAttrib_VistaBuffer
  • kPOVAttrib_DrawVistas

This bug should be edited to add/remove items as time goes by.

278BackendFeature Request3.70 RC7Very LowMediumImplement Lens Flare RenderingTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

Currently POV-Ray does not support rendering lens flare effects, however, they can be simulated using a macro (include file) by Chris Colefax.

I would like to suggest adding a feature to POV-Ray to support lens effects “natively” since

  • as far as I know the macro has been designed for POV-Ray 3.1 so with each new POV-Ray version it gets more likely that this macro does not work properly any more
  • the macro does not work when rendering with radiosity, probably because the macro creates the lens effect by using a pigment with a high ambient value (which is ignored by POV-Ray 3.7’s radiosity algorithm).

Additionally, the macro is not quite easy to employ because

  • it needs to know the exact camera parameters (location etc.) and defines an own camera itself so any important camera information has to be stored if the effect has to work as expected
  • it does not (actually cannot) take into account that objects may (partially) hide the lens effect
  • reflections and refractions (of light sources) cannot be combined with it properly - the user would have to calculate both the point where the reflected/refracted light source can be observed and the shape it then has due to distortion, and in more complex scenes such computations are nearly impossible in SDL.

I would suggest integrating such a lens flare rendering feature with the “looks like” mechanism you already have for light sources. Several parameters that can currently be set for the macro - including effect brightness and intensity, lens options and whether to create a flare at all - could be set for the light source.

Then POV-Ray could store the location and colour of each ray that finally intersected the “looks like” object of a light source and, having finished the main rendering, from that data compute a partially transparent “lens flare layer” eventually mixed into the rendered image. By this, the above mentioned problems could be avoided:

  • an object fully or partially intersecting a light source’s “looks like” object would also reduce the number of pixels used to create a flare - and therefore reduce that flare until fully hiding it
  • the same goes for reflected and/or refracted versions of the “looks like” object
  • the camera’s location and other properties would be used automatically
  • and finally, as a feature supported by POV-Ray itself, there would be neither compatibility issues nor problems like the effect not fitting together with radiosity.

Do not get me wrong, I would not expect POV-Ray to really calculate intersections that naturally happen in a camera lens, causing lens flares. Effects looking appropriate can actually be created just in 2D space (as some graphics programs do support) so the work to be done would, as far as I have any overview, be:

  • storing, as mentioned above, the relevant data for pixels showing “looks like” objects
  • calculating a lens flare from that data after the render has finished
  • overlaying the rendered image with the newly created lens effect.
237User interfaceDefinite Bug3.70 RC3DeferVery LowGlitch in displaying rendered pixels and percentageTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

When rendering in multiple passes (radiosity in my case), the elapsed pixels and percentage, written to terminal
are first displayed like this:
Rendered 126202 of 360000 pixels (35%)
Then on the second stage the output text becomes shorter and you see
Rendered 25344 of 360000 pixels (7%)%)
The contents of the previous status are not erased, so the longer text persists (note the duplicate percentage sign and closing parenthesis). Such a glitch could have more drastic effect in rare cases.

I’m running
Version 3.7.0.RC3 (g++ 4.6.2 x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
compiled for the Arch Linux package.

91Texture/Material/FinishFeature Request3.70 beta 36DeferLowSlope pattern applied to object is not transformed afte...Tracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

There is an big issue with the slope pattern: when the object it is applied to is instanced (again) with a transformation (in particular a rotation, as a translation would not impact.. but a shear might), the colours of the surfaces are changed.

  
object { p translate -5*x }
object { p rotate 220*y+20*x    translate 3*x }       

Nobody would expect the object to be different in appearance.
If slope {} is replaced with wood, all is fine. (as for others textures, i guess)

IMHO, the slope vector need to be adjusted for the later transformation(s) (so as to compensate the issue of using the Perturbed Normal vector).

This should not impact the AOI/FACING (experimental) patterns, as AOI definition is pretty clear about duplicating & transform if you think about it a bit, as well as FACING: for these two, it is expected to either use the ray(current point of view) or a fixed 3D point as reference. At the limit, discussion about moving the 3D point of FACING might also be opened to interpretation.

AOI/FACING are in task #19

6Subsurface ScatteringUnimp. Feature/TODO3.70 beta 32DeferLowIntegrate Subsurface Scattering with PhotonsTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

Subsurface scattering must be made photon-aware.

98Refactoring/CleanupUnimp. Feature/TODO3.70 beta 36DeferMediumRefactor Windows UI code for Unicode supportTracked on GitHub
50%
Future release Task Description

Windows UI code should be refactored to use _TCHAR throughout instead of char, as well as the corresponding string function macros, to head for Unicode support.

99Refactoring/CleanupUnimp. Feature/TODO3.70 beta 36DeferVery LowRefactor engine (front- & back-end) code for Unicode su...Tracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

Front- & Back-end code should be refactored for full Unicode support in scene files and strings.

8RadiosityUnimp. Feature/TODO3.70 beta 32DeferLowImprove Radiosity "Cross-Talk" Rejection in CornersTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

Near concave edges, radiosity samples may be re-used at a longer distance away from the edge than towards the edge; there is code in place to ensure this, but it only works properly where two surfaces meet roughly rectangularly, while failing near the junction of three surfaces or non-rectangular edges, potentially causing “cross-talk”.

It should be investigated how the algorithm can be improved or replaced to better cope with non-trivial geometry.

264PhotonsUnimp. Feature/TODO3.70 RC6DeferLowImprove precision of photon direction informationTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

In the photons map, the direction of each photon is stored as separate latitude & longitude angles (encoded in one byte each), causing the longitudinal direction component’s precision to be unnecessarily high for directions close to the “poles” (Y axis); in addition, encoded value -128 is never used. For better overall precision as well as precision homogenity, the following scheme could be used instead:

  • Encode the latitude (-pi/2 to +pi/2) into LatCount=226 distinct values (= 256*sqrt(pi)/2) rounded to the next even number) from 0 to LatCount-1 using
latCode = (int)((LatCount-1) * (lat/M_PI + 0.5) + 0.5)
  • For each latitude code, define a specific number of encodable longitude values, LngCount[latCode] = approx. cos(lat)*pi*65536/(2*LatCount); this can be a pre-computed table, and may need slight tweaking for optimum use of the code space. Encode the longitude (-pi to +pi) into a value from 0 to (LngCount[lat]-1) using
LC = LngCount[latCode];
lngCode = (int)(LC * (lng/(2*M_PI) + 0.5) + 0.5) % LC;
  • Besides LngCount[latCode], also store the sum of LngCount[i] with i < latCode as LatBase[latCode]; encode the direction as
dirCode = LatBase[latCode] + lngCode;
  • For decoding, a simple lookup from a precomputed list of directions could be used (2^15 entries, i.e. one hemisphere, will suffice). To conserve space, direction vectors could be scaled by (2^N-1) and stored as (N+1)-bit signed integer triples rather than floating point values; due to the limited precision of the lat/long information, 8 bits per coordinate might be enough, giving a table size of 96k. A full double-precision table would require 786k instead.
58Parser/SDLUnimp. Feature/TODO3.70 beta 32DeferLowallow SDL code to detect optional featuresTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

Some features are optional in custom builds of POV-Ray (I’m thinking about OpenEXR in particular); it would be nice to have a syntax for an SDL script to check for support of such features, so it may take some fallback action if the feature is not supported.

86Parser/SDLFeature RequestNot applicableDeferVery LowAdd support for more RNG typesTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

The current 32-bit linear congruential generator used as RNG in POV-Ray is sometimes quite limited for some purposes and in a few cases its poor quality shows up (as has been demonstrated more than once in the newsgroup). Thus it would be nice if POV-Ray offered additional, higher-quality random number generators, besides the current one (which should probably remain for backwards compatibility). These RNGs could include algorithms like the Mersenne Twister and the ISAAC RNG, both of which have very decent quality and have an enormous periods (while at the same time being very fast).

After a long discussion, the following syntax for specifying the RNG type and seed (which may be larger than 32 bits) has been suggested:

seed(<value>) | seed(<type>, <value> [, <values>])

For example:

#declare Seed1 = seed(123); // Use the current RNG, with seed 123
#declare Seed2 = seed(1, 123); // Identical to the previous one
#declare Seed3 = seed(2, 456, 789, 123); // Use RNG algorithm #2,
                                         // with a large seed (96 bits specified here)

A C++ implementation of the ISAAC RNG can be found at http://warp.povusers.org/IsaacRand.zip

129Parser/SDLFeature Request3.70 beta 37aDeferVery LowHash arraysTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

Currently, array items may only be referenced by their index number (an integer). It would be nice to also be able to assign string values as array indexes, as in other scripting languages.

85OtherFeature RequestNot applicableDeferLowAspect ratio issuesTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

Background

When rendering an image, there are actually three aspect ratios involved:

1) The aspect ratio of the camera, set with the up and right vectors.

2) The aspect ratio of the rendered image, set with the +W and +H parameters.

3) The aspect ratio of the pixels in the intended target medium. While this is very often 1:1, it’s definitely not always so (anamorphic images are common in some media, such as DVDs).

The aspect ratio of the camera does not (and arguably should not, although some people might disagree) define the aspect ratio of the image resolution, but the aspect ratio of the image as shown on the final medium. In other words, it defines how the image should be displayed, not what the resolution of the image should be.

This of course means that the aspect ratio of the target medium pixels has to be taken into account when specifying the image resolution. If the target medium pixels are not 1:1 (eg. when rendering for a medium with non-square pixels, or when rendering an anamorphic image eg. for a DVD), the proper resolution has to be specified so that the aspect ratio of the displayed image remains the same as the one specified in the camera block.

This isn’t generally a problem. It usually goes like “my screen is physically 4:3, so I design my scene for that aspect ratio, but the resolution of my screen is mxn which is not 4:3, but that doesn’t matter; I just render with +Wm +Hn and I get a correct image for my screen”.

However, problems start when someone renders an image using an image aspect ratio / pixel aspect ratio combination which does not match the camera aspect ratio. By far the most common situation is rendering a scene with a 4:3 camera for a screen with square pixels but with a non-4:3 resolution (most typically 16:9 or 16:10 nowadays). The image will be horizontally
stretched.

In a few cases the effect is the reverse: The scene (and thus the camera) has been designed for some less-typical aspect ratio, eg. a cinematic 2.4:1 aspect ratio, but then someone renders the image with a 4:3 resolution. The resulting image will be horizontally squeezed.

In a few cases this is actually the correct and desired behavior, ie. when you are really rendering the image in an anamorphic format (eg. for a DVD). However, often it’s an inadverted mistake.

Some people argue that this default behavior should be changed. However, there are also good arguments why it should not be changed. Some argue that POV-Ray should have more features (at the SDL level, at the command-line level or both) to control this behavior.

There are several possible situations, which is why this issue is so complicated. These situations may include:

- The scene author doesn’t really care what aspect ratio is used to render the image, even if it means that additional parts of the scenery become visible or parts are cropped away when using a different aspect ratio than what he used.

In this case the choice of camera aspect ratio should be up to the person who renders the image, and thus selectable on the command-line. However, he should have an easy choice of how changing the aspect ratio affects the image: Should it extend the viewing range, or should it crop part of it, compared to the original?

And this, of course, while still making it possible to render for an anamorphic format.

- The author wants to support different aspect ratios, but he wants to control precisely how it affects the composition of the image. Maybe he never wants anything cropped away within certain limits, but instead the image should always be extended in whichever direction is necessary due to the aspect ratio. Or maybe he wants to allow cropping the image, but only up to a certain point. Or whatever.

In this case the choice of camera aspect ratio should be up to the author, and thus selectable in the scene file, while still allowing some changes from the command-line.

- The author designed his scene for a precise aspect ratio and nothing else, and doesn’t want the image to be rendered in any other aspect ratio. Maybe he used some very peculiar aspect ratio (eg. something like 1:2, ie. twice as tall as wide) for artistic composition reasons, and wants the image rendered with that aspect ratio, period.

Perhaps the author should be able to completely forbid the change of camera aspect ratio in the command-line.

Of course anamorphic rendering should still be supported for targets with a different pixel aspect ratio.

Possible solution

This solution does not necessarily address all the problems described above perfectly, but could be a good starting point for more ideas:

Add a way to specify in the camera block minimum and maximum limits for the horizontal and vertical viewing angles (and if any of them is unspecified, it’s unlimited). Of course for this to be useful in any way, there should also be a way to change the camera and pixel aspect ratios from the command line.

The idea with this is that the author of the scene can use these angle limits to define a rectangular “protected zone” at the center of the view, using the minimum angle limits. In other words, no matter how the camera aspect ratio is modified, the horizontal and/or vertical viewing angles will never get smaller than these minimum angles. This ensures that the image will never be cropped beyond a certain limit, only extended either horizontally or vertically to ensure that the “protected zone” always remains fully visible regardless of what aspect ratio is used.

The maximum angles can be used for the reverse: They ensure that no scenery beyond a certain point will ever become visible, no matter what aspect ratio is used. This can be used to make sure that unmodelled parts of the scene never come into view. Thus the image will always be cropped to ensure this, depending on the aspect ratio.

I’m not completely sure what should be done if both minimum and maximum angles are specified, and the user specifies an aspect ratio which would break these limits. An error message could be a possibility. At least it would be a way for the author to make sure his scene is never rendered using an aspect ratio he doesn’t want. He can use these angle limits to give some leeway how much the aspect ratio can change, to an extent, or he could even force a specific aspect ratio and nothing else (by specifying that both the minimum and maximum angles are the same).

So in short:

- Add a “minimum/maximum horizontal/vertical angles” feature to the camera block. These can be used to define a “protected zone” in the image which must not be breached by command-line options.

- Add a command-line syntax to change the camera aspect ratio (which automatically obeys the “protected zone” settings). Could perhaps give an error message if the command-line options break the limits in the scene camera.

- Add a command-line syntax to specify a pixel aspect ratio other than 1:1. This can be used to render anamorphic versions of the image on purpose (iow. not by mistake).

This can probably be made backwards-compatible in that if none of these new features are used, the behavior could be the same as currently (or at least similar).

242OtherFeature RequestAllDeferVery LowAlgorithm to fix the so-called shadow line artifactTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

The so-called shadow line artifact (http://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:The_Shadow_Line_Artifact) which affects objects with a ‘normal’ statement as well as smooth meshes and heightfields can be really annoying sometimes. Currently the only way to remove it is to make the object shadowless, which isn’t a good solution except in very special cases.

This algorithm could remove the artifact: If the actual normal vector of the object points away from the light source (its dot-product with the light vector is negative) but the perturbed normal points towards it (dot-product positive), then ignore the first shadow-test intersection with the object itself.

There are alternative ways of implementing an equivalent functionality:

- Don’t check the condition (if it’s too difficult to check due to how the code is designed) but always ignore the first intersection with the objects itself. This will work properly with closed surfaces but not with open ones, so it might need to be a feature for the user to turn on with a keyword (similar to eg. ‘double_illuminate’).

- Alternatively, don’t ignore the first intersection, but instead ignore the “opposite side” of the object’s surface (again, possibly only if a keyword has been specified). In other words, if we are rendering the outer side of the object, ignore its inner side when shadow-testing, and vice-versa.

- Perhaps simply add a feature to make surfaces one-sided (similarly to how they can be made so in OpenGL and similar scanline rendering systems). In other words, the inner side of a surface is completely ignored everywhere, making the object virtually invisible from the inside. The advantage of this feature would be that it can have uses other than simply removing the shadow line artifact.

245OtherFeature RequestAllDeferLowPOVMS message queue can fill up with GB of data for ver...Tracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

With very fast renders and very large output files, the message queue can fill up because the producers are not limited by IO, while the consumer performance is limited by disk IO. Consequently, the message queue can fill up to exhaust all available memory. The solution is to build in some better control of pending output data in the message queue on the producer side. This will also pave the way for message communication over slow links (i.e. a network).

272OtherFeature Request3.70 RC6DeferVery LowMinor change, significant speedup in cubic polynomial s...Tracked on GitHub
0%
3.71 release Task Description

While familiarizing myself with the code, I found some small changes in the solve_cubic function that lead to a significant speedup.

In my experience, “pow” is by far the slowest function in math.h and replacing it with simpler functions usually makes a tremendous impact on the speed (it’s an order of magnitude slower than sqrt/exp/cbrt/log).

solve_cubic has a “pow” function that can be replaced by cbrt (cubic root), which is standard in ISO-C99 and should be available on all systems. Separate benchmarks of solve_cubic function show this change almost doubles the speed and does not lower the accuracy. As solve_cubic is part of the solution of quartic equation, this improves the speed for many primitives. Testing with a scene containing many torus intersection tests (attached below) I still observed almost 10% speedup (Intel, 4 threads, 2 hyperthreaded cores, antialiasing on, 600×600: from 91 to 84 seconds). And this is for a torus, where a lot of time is spent in the solve_quartic and cubic solver is only called once! Similar speedup should be expected for prism, ovus, sor and blob.

I do believe the cubic solver can be done without trigonometry, but that would mean changing the algorithm, introducing new bugs and requiring a lot of testing. However, the trigonometric evaluation can still be simplified (3% speedup in full torus benchmark).

These changes don’t affect the algorithm at all, they are mathematically identical to the existing code, so the changes can be applied immediately. I also included other changes just as suggestions. Every change is commented and marked with [SC 2.2013].

This sadly does not speedup the sturm solver, which uses bisection and regula-falsi and looks very optimized already.

The test scene I used has a lot of torus intersections from various directions (shadow rays, main rays, transmitted rays).

300OtherFeature Request3.70 RC7DeferVery LowReference Documentation SupportTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

As emerged as an idea during the discussion of FS#299, an SDL / POV-Ray editor feature would be useful that allows API documentation via formal comments, e.g. in include files:

/**
 * Creates a car object.
 * @param a
 *        description of param a
 * ...
 */
#macro car(a,b,c)
  ...
#end

In addition to the ability of (auto-)generating a documentation file from such comments, an editor window feature would be convenient that allows popup display of a macro’s (object’s / parameter’s / ...) documentation section.

303OtherDefinite Bug3.70 RC7DeferVery Lowwrong bit depth reported for OpenEXR file formatTracked on GitHub
0%
Task Description

When using OpenEXR output file format, POV-Ray erroneously reports it as “24 bpp EXR” in the message output, while in fact it generates a 3×16 = 48 bpp file.

282Image formatFeature RequestNot applicableDeferLowUnrendered region should be transparent, not blackTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

When rendering only a region of a file, using the command-line options +sc/+sr/+ec/+er, the area of the image that is excluded comes out as black in the final PNG.

Expected behaviour is for it to be transparent.

87Geometric PrimitivesFeature RequestNot applicableDeferVery LowAdd new feature: Reference objectTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

When you instantiate an object several times, eg:

object { MyObj translate -x*10 }
object { MyObj translate x*10 }

POV-Ray will copy that object in memory, at least for most types of objects. Not for all of them, though. Most famously if MyObj is a mesh, it won’t be copied, but only a reference to the original will be used, thus saving memory. (There are a few other primitives which also don’t cause a copy, such as bicubic_patch and blob, but those are naturally not so popular as mesh, so it’s a less known fact.)

AFAIK the reason why referencing (rather than copying) is not used for all types of objects is rather complicated, and mostly related to how transformations are applied to these objects. For example if the object being instantiated is a union, the translates above will be (AFAIK) applied to the individual members of the union rather than to the union object itself.

Copying, however, can be quite detrimental in some situations. For example if you have a huge union, and you want to instantiate it many times, the memory usage will be that many times larger (compared to just one instance). This is sometimes something which the user would not want, even if it made the rendering slightly slower as a consequence. (In other words, better to be able to render the scene in the first place, rather than running out of memory.)

Redesigning POV-Ray so that all objects would be referenced rather than copied would probably be a huge job, and in some cases a questionable one. There probably are situations where the current method really produces faster rendering times, so redesigning POV-Ray so that it would always reference instead of copy, could make some scenes render slower.

So this got me thinking about an alternative approach: How hard would it be to create a special object which sole purpose is to act as a reference to another object, without copying it? This special reference object would act as any regular object, would have its own transformation matrix and all that data related to objects, but its sole purpose is to simply be a “wrapper” which references an existing object. It could be, for example, like this:

object_ref { MyObj translate -x*10 }
object_ref { MyObj translate x*10 }

The end result would be exactly identical as earlier, but the difference is that now MyObj behaves in the same way as a mesh (in the sense that it’s not instantiated twice, but only once, even though it appears twice in the scene), regardless of what MyObj is.

In some cases this might render slightly slower than the first version (because POV-Ray has to apply the transformations of the object_ref first, after which it applies whatever transformations are inside MyObj), but that’s not the point here. The point is to save memory if MyObj is large.

An object_ref would behave like any other object, so you could do things like:

#declare MyObjRef = object_ref { MyObj };

object { MyObjRef translate -x*10 }
object { MyObjRef translate x*10 }

(The only thing being instantiated (and copied) here is the “MyObjRef” object, not the object it’s referring to, so that actual object is still stored in memory only once.)

In some situations it might even be so that referenced objects actually render faster than if the objects were copied because references increase data locality, lessening cache misses.

I believe this could be a rather useful feature and should be seriously considered, unless there are some major obstacles in implementing it.

133Geometric PrimitivesFeature Request3.70 beta 37aDeferVery LowSubdivision supportTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

Someone built a version of Povray with internal support for automatic subdivision of meshes. See:

http://www.cise.ufl.edu/~xwu/Pov-Sub/

Would like to see this feature added natively to Povray.

243Geometric PrimitivesUnimp. Feature/TODOAllDeferLowSphere sweep behaves wrong when scaledTracked on GitHub
0%
Future release Task Description

The sphere_sweep renders well when specified directly, but when it is scaled, its bounding box is calculated incorrectly, which clips the object so it almost disappears.

The effect is present for all three types of splines.

I’m attaching a test scene and the rendering result. The saving of the object with #declare has no effect, I just wanted to show both transformed and untransformed version.

I don’t think this issue is related to other artifacts occuring with sphere_sweep, as it is obviously an issue of the internal bounding box.

Showing tasks 51 - 100 of 103 Page 2 of 3 - 1 - 2 - 3 -

Available keyboard shortcuts

Tasklist

Task Details

Task Editing