Received: from tom.compulink.co.uk by netcom6.netcom.com (8.6.9/Netcom)
id PAA09456; Wed, 18 Jan 1995 15:13:23 -0800
Received: from gonzales.compulink.co.uk (gonzales.compulink.co.uk [192.188.69.4]) by tom.compulink.co.uk (8.6.9/8.6.9) id XAA10975 for lightwave-l@netcom.com; Wed, 18 Jan 1995 23:09:45 GMT
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 23:12 GMT
From: garygfx@cix.compulink.co.uk (Gary Fenton)
Subject: Re: Real specs on rendering
To: lightwave-l@netcom.com
Reply-To: garygfx@cix.compulink.co.uk
Message-Id: <memo.968076@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Sender: owner-lightwave-l@netcom.com
Precedence: bulk
>OK, So I've heard all the "my system is better than your system"
>arguments. Is there an independent testing facility that can actually
>prove any of these claims? Is there some sort of FAQ or info file
>that us
Some companies use the "textures" example that comes with Lightwave as
a benchmark for quoting LW rendering speeds. I think this is a good
method because it's a practical one (not just a n MIPS quote) and it's