[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GR: GFDL Position Statement

Francesco Poli wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 17:32:48 +0100 Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
>>* Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> [2006-01-18 11:01]:
>> As an example I want to question if I would have to move xblast* to
>>contrib, because the graphics are rendered with povray, or if there is
>>no need for it? There are for sure other graphics that fall under the
>>same thing; at least I can say for xblast that I'm in the good
>>position to have the povray source available with which the images
>>were rendered. But would producing them on build-time really raise the
>>quality, moving xblast* to contrib? If this is done then please think
>>of other packages with the same "problem", too.
> I think it should be moved to contrib and graphics should be rerendered
> from its actual source at build time.
> Consider this: if I wanted to fork xblast by modifying the graphics, I
> would need the povray source (and the povray program, which is
> unfortunately non-free).
> Every attempt to change (for example) the camera positioning would from
> hard to nearly impossible without povray source files. Hence, the
> preferred form for making modification to xblast graphics is the
> corresponding povray files (unless they are on their turn automatically
> generated from something else...). 

One useful point here is that there exist Free renderers for POVRay
files, such as KPovModeler.  I don't know to what extent they implement
the features of POVRay.

- Josh Triplett

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: