I'm thinking that the depth map should be written out in piRender instead of piWrite. I think this might be a better idea because of the following scenario:
Say we have a single PBRT file (xxx.pbrt) we got online that we want to render. If we run piRender we will get an error since there is no corresponding (xxx_depth.pbrt) that goes with it. So instead, the user has to figure out what the error means, and then specifically run piRender('xxx.pbrt','renderType','radiance') so that piRender isn't looking for a depth map.
It seems to me that re-reading the recipe in piRender and then writing out a xxx_depth.pbrt file seems to make more sense.
I'm thinking that the depth map should be written out in piRender instead of piWrite. I think this might be a better idea because of the following scenario:
Say we have a single PBRT file (xxx.pbrt) we got online that we want to render. If we run piRender we will get an error since there is no corresponding (xxx_depth.pbrt) that goes with it. So instead, the user has to figure out what the error means, and then specifically run piRender('xxx.pbrt','renderType','radiance') so that piRender isn't looking for a depth map.
It seems to me that re-reading the recipe in piRender and then writing out a xxx_depth.pbrt file seems to make more sense.