I’ll keep an eye out, should this be added to the standard palette of views in the source. I think it’s pretty easy to add it to the Qt rvu...
On 1/8/17, 10:18 AM, "Gregory J. Ward" <gregoryjw...@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi Victor (& Nathaniel), > > >I am happy to take a look at the code and see how much effort it would be >to integrate. I have a question first, however. > > >Is the "equirectangular" view useful for anything less than a full >panorama? Would people want to use it for smaller/different views, or do >you always set vertical to 180° and horizontal to 360° in every >application? > > >If you only use this view for one purpose, then I wonder if it is really >worth having a view implemented in Radiance, which needs to handle every >possible setting correctly. Also, I wonder in such a case if you have >tested every possible (legal) setting? > > >Cheers, >-Greg > > >From: >Victor LRG <rio...@gmail.com> >Date: >January 8, 2017 3:49:00 AM PST > > > > > >Nathaniel, > > >So far my implementation the equirectangular view seems to work. The only >part that I have not touched for full support is util/rpiece.c because I >don't use it very often. You can also create an equirectangular view >through other routes, but I find having > it inside the code faster and more convenient. > > >I'm happy to share it. Personally, I think it would be useful to >incorporate it into the main distribution, but that's a question for Greg. > > >Cheers, > > >Victor Lopez-Rioboo Gil > > > > >On 7 January 2017 at 18:42, Nathaniel Jones ><nathaniel...@gmail.com> wrote: > >Hi Victor, > > >I'm considering implementing equirectangular view for some of my own >work, and before I start, I was wondering what the state of your >implementation is and whether you might share it. Also, is this something >that might work its way into the main Radiance > distribution? > > >Happy new year, > > >Nathaniel > > >On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Victor LRG ><rio...@gmail.com> wrote: > >Rob, > > >I have tried the last official release, so just 5.0. I'll try 5.0.a.12 to >see what happens. I have used the NREL Windows installers before and I >had no issues. > > >The reason I wanted to compile Radiance myself is that I was playing >around with the source code and I wanted to try the changes. So far I >have incorporated an equirectangular view to rpict (see Radiance General >October 2016 Creating new view types for > Radiance) and an additional option for pextrem. They do seem to work >fine in Linux, but unfortunately I not always have access to a Linux >machine. Therefore, it would be great to be able to compile it for >Windows. > > >I'll have a look at the link to the commit. For now a was using the >CMakeLists.txt that came with the source code package with the following >modifications: > > >cmake_policy(SET CMP0045 OLD) > >SET(CMAKE_PREFIX_PATH “C:/Qt/5.7/msvc2015_64/lib/cmake/Qt5Widgets”) >SET(TIFF_INCLUDE_DIR “C:/Program Files (x86)/GnuWin32/include”) > > > >I'll try using the CMake/MSVC/libtiff/Qt versions you suggest to see if >that makes a difference. > > >Many thanks, > > >Victor > > > > > > > > >On 22 December 2016 at 14:39, Guglielmetti, Robert ><robert.guglielme...@nrel.gov> wrote: > >What¹s the vintage of the source code? There were a couple of minor >patches to the 5.0 official release (Mid-September), and the last tag that >builds for Windows for me is the 'NREL 5.0.a.12¹ tag: > >https://github.com/NREL/Radiance/releases/tag/5.0.a.12 > > >You could try the Windows installers we have, which seem to be working: > >https://github.com/NREL/Radiance/releases/download/5.0.a.6/radiance-5.0.a. >6 >-win64.exe ><https://github.com/NREL/Radiance/releases/download/5.0.a.6/radiance-5.0.a >.6-win64.exe> >https://github.com/NREL/Radiance/releases/download/5.0.a.6/radiance-5.0.a. >6 >-win32.exe ><https://github.com/NREL/Radiance/releases/download/5.0.a.6/radiance-5.0.a >.6-win32.exe> > >I also Œget¹ wanting to roll your own, though. Again you¹d need to make >sure your source aligns with this commit, or earlier: >https://github.com/NREL/Radiance/commit/0c842736bf2b0908ba0ea42963ea8f4680 >c >d1fc5 ><https://github.com/NREL/Radiance/commit/0c842736bf2b0908ba0ea42963ea8f468 >0cd1fc5> > >And for the record, that NREL Windows build used Cmake 3.3.2, MSVC 12 >2013, a libtiff I rolled myself with 4.0.4-beta, and Qt5.3. > >The NREL packages aren¹t bulletproof, I¹m finding, but xform and oconv >seem to work fine. It¹d be potentially mutually beneficial for you to try >the NREL package on your input and see what happens. Or, send me your test >input and we can go from there. > >- Rob > > >On 12/22/16, 5:15 AM, "Victor LRG" <rio...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>Dear all, >> >>I amtrying to compile Radiance 5R0 for Windows using Cmake 3.7.1 x86 and >>MVSC 2015 v14 with libtiff 3.8.2 and qt-x86-2.0.4. The compilation >>finished with no errors (although some 1700 warnings), but when I am >>trying a simple test >> I get the following error with ovonv: fatal - (!xform >>objects/cage_sphere2.rad): bad arguments for polygon "311s1m134f". This >>object has the following description, which seems right to me: >> >> >>cage_sphere polygon 311s1m134f >>0 >>0 >>9 -0.833925170898 0.506038208008 0.096073600769 >> -0.819481933594 0.473128112793 0.0903565139771 >> -0.853187255859 0.492587890625 0.0980178833008 >> >> >> >>In VS I can see the following warnings regarding oconv and xform: >> >> >>C4273 'erf': inconsistent dll linkage >>C4273 'erfc': inconsistent dll linkage >> >> >> >>They both refer to rtmath.h file, which I guess they should refer to >>erf.c as well? Actually, this warning also appears for most projects. >>I've compiled and used the same package in linux before with no problem. >> >> >>Any ideas? >> >> >>Thanks >> >> >>Victor Lopez-Rioboo Gil >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ Radiance-dev mailing list Radiance-dev@radiance-online.org http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-dev
