Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!ogicse!milton!hlab
From: fmgst@unix.cis.pitt.edu (Filip Gieszczykiewicz)
Newsgroups: sci.virtual-worlds
Subject: Real-time raytrace and some related "ramblings"
Message-ID: <1991May13.193721.5473@milton.u.washington.edu>
Date: 13 May 91 05:53:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: milton.1991May13.193721.5473
Sender: hlab@milton.u.washington.edu (Human Int. Technology Lab)
Organization: The Last Jedi
Lines: 58
Approved: cyberoid@milton.u.washington.edu



        Greetings. Well, I finally got my 486/25 (33MHz was a _bit_ above
        my budget :-) First thing I did was a "benchmark". I ran an
        older version of qrt (Quick RayTracer - author:???). After studing
        the results, something dawned on me:

        Real-time raytracing is not as far away as most of you led me
        to believe.... Why? Well, I did a 320x200x~256 image of a
        sphere, 1/2 cylinder "pillar", and a room with brick walls (one of the
        files included in the .ZIP file). It took less than 2 minutes.
        
        Now, I realize that 320x200 is not "super" but that's the
        resolution of (to my knowledge) most color LCD screens (from which
        goggles are made) If I can do a frame in under 2 minutes, the addition
        of a few processors would do a much better job, say, a frame in half 
        a second or less. With twice than many processors, that time would be 
        cut in half - or, what is the current update rate for most VR systems.
        Anyone have any comments? ;-) By the way, does anyone know
        of a processor board (besides the Transputer) that could be used
        in this application? I'm looking for something that is not only
        low cost but also permits more boards to be added for more
        processing power. 

        Also, anyone know if such a board would make a good senior project? 
        I was thinking of using 68010/68881 pairs per board with some 
        (say 4 megs) local memory and a well organized buss (I think it's 
        asking too much to use the pathetic ISA buss that's in most ATs 
        (yeah, also in mine :-( 

        Such a system would have several main goals: 

                1) price (must be low so that "simple" people like me can
        afford it - also, since more own it, more software gets written)

                2) expendability and modularity (add more boards -> more 
        power and adding another board does not require recompiling the
        whole OS))

                3) programability (must be programmed in an object-
        oriented language - how about C++? - programs may be developed
        on the subsystem (if that is the implementation) or downloaded
        at execution time...)

                4) more to follow.... :-)

        I'll "tidy up" a crude proposal I sent to a friend of mine and
        post it here - in it, I describe the project I want to do as my
        senior project (or, just for fun :-)

        I'll welcome any suggestions.

        Take care.
-- 
_______________________________________________________________________________
"The Force will be with you, always." It _is_ with me and has been for 11 years
Filip Gieszczykiewicz  "... a Jedi does it with a mind trick... " ;-)
FMGST@PITTVMS  or  fmgst@unix.cis.pitt.edu "My ideas. ALL MINE!!"