Hey guys, I kind of liked the image :) at least until reading all these
techno-notes about it.
A great picture is bound to get more scrutiny than others though.
And I have a thought too. Looks like quite a bit of turbulence used,
depending on how it was applied, that can cause some level of graininess
too. The artist might have even preferred the look of it as is anyhow.
And if emission or absorption is used the crandy nature increases
drastically over pure scatter and density alone, from what I've seen. Be
willing to bet absortion, at least, was used.
The flaming parts were noticably ephemeral looking to me and caught my
attention more than the sooty smoke did. A tighter, torrent of flames
would have looked nice.
Want to say, btw, loved the pictures detail and "overall" look.

Dan Connelly wrote:
> 
> Stephen Lavedas wrote:
> >
> > About Atmospheric banding... I had problems with that even though I set
> > sample VERY high... then I realized that since I was running my Desktop
> > at 16bit color, I was viewing a 24bit image, undithered at
> > 16bits...Changing my Desktop to 32bit cleared up the banding.  Just a
> > comment (it doesn't fix the media grain artifact, but I must believe
> > that this graininess can be used somehow..)
> 
> The problem with the image in question (FSaP) is clearly not color
> discritization....
> 
> The problem is the simple Monte-Carlo technique used by POV.  Each pixel
> has the integral calculated independently from its neighboring
> pixels.  This is wasting information.  More sophisticated Monte-Carlo
> techniques can be used, with introduction of potentially considerable
> complexity, which make use of the generally smoothly-varying nature
> of the media fields.
> 
> The problem reminds me of the one in semiconductor device processing,
> where Monte-Carlo is being used to predict the distribution of ions
> which result from the bombardment of semiconductor device surfaces
> with charged dopants.  Some excellent results were demonstrated
> at the latest International Electron Device Conference in San Francisco
> of the use of some clever but relatively simple techniques to get
> more out of each randomly sampled ion event.  For example, one can
> do "particle splitting" in which more than one particle shares part of a path,
> but then part way through is split into multiple particles to generate
> different random paths.  But I digress....
> 
> The improvement of the interior methods would make an excellent
> subject for a patch.
> 
> Dan
> 
> --
> http://www.flash.net/~djconnel/

-- 
 omniVERSE: beyond the universe
  http://members.aol.com/inversez/POVring.htm
=Bob

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (1 KB)