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

Re: GR: GFDL Position Statement

Umm, Kpovmodeler isn't a renderer, it's a modelling program that calls
POVRay to actually render it. So KPovModeler should be in contrib.


On 1/20/06, Josh Triplett <josh@freedesktop.org> wrote:
> 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

Andrew Donnellan
Jabber - ajdlinux@jabber.org.au
Member of Linux Australia - http://linux.org.au
Debian user - http://debian.org
Get free rewards - http://ezyrewards.com/?id=23484
OpenNIC user - http://www.opennic.unrated.net

Reply to: