On 28.07.2017 21:14, omniverse wrote:
> Sven Littkowski <I### [at] SvenLittkowskiname> wrote:
>>
>> Okay, everyone: I herewith declare myself as a big fool!
>> I use POV-Ray for soooo many years, since around 1990 or so, and can you
>> believe it I just oversaw all the time of posting here, that I used:
>> QUALITY = 6
>> And did not even think about checking for the Q setting!!!!!
>> SHAME ON ME! I wasted so much of your all valuable time! But at least,
>> one more time the POV-Ray community has proven its great pioneer-alike
>> spirit! I owe you all my big thanks!
> 
> That explains it.
> You have been raytracing too long when... quality settings are forgotten!
> LOL
> I am glad that problem is solved, regardless of why!
> :)
> 
> I was just about to email you back to say it looks okay again.
> Although before I rendered the balloon, seeing that very dark texture image_map
> for it, I was thinking it must be too dark to show the normal_map. Yet it isn't,
> mine looks the same as your quality change render now.
> 
> Bob
> 
> P.S.  Still don't know if you want that parachute piece hovering over the
> balloon (makes the little shadow on left top edge).
> I keep removing it by using:
> 
> #declare LowerBalloonShape = difference
> {
>  sphere { < 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 > MyRadius }
>  cylinder {
>   < 0.0, 0.0, 0.0 > < 0.0, /*175.001*/MyRadius+0.001, 0.0 >
>    MyRadius+0.001 }
>  scale < 1.0, 1.5, 1.0 >
> }
> 
> 
Really, I am sooo ashamed. :-D

Thanks for reminding me about that parachute. I didn't see it yet, but I
will give now more distance with the camera to see it.

YES - that parachute gotta go! I use now your suggested code that I
should have added long time ago. I simply forgot that area, when i a
longer time ago changed the diameter from 175 to 200.

Starting to think now about the best outside surface attributes
(finishes). Don't know, how the surface attributes of a balloon are, I
admit. it is not one of those ultra-thin surfaces, because of the huge
size of the balloon. The surface material would be more similar to that
of a zeppelin, I think, as more stability is required. After all, we
speak about a total diameter of 400 meters! :-)

---
Diese E-Mail wurde von AVG auf Viren geprüft.
http://www.avg.com

Post a reply to this message