POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.animations : Alphabet blocks Server Time: 20 Jun 2019 19:52:52 GMT
  Alphabet blocks (Message 1 to 10 of 17)  
Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 7 Messages >>>
From: Jaime Vives Piqueres
Subject: Alphabet blocks
Date: 25 Sep 2012 06:51:00
Message: <50615454$1@news.povray.org>
Hi All:

   Here is a little animation I created while testing the Bullet Physics
Playground by Koppi. This tool generated 333 .pov scenes, which I
processed with Regexxer to replace the simple boxes by my own
block-letter objects. Apart from this, and setting up a simple room
environment, all I did was adding some trigonometry to the camera
transformations to get a "not-too-mechanical" movement.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFWYgB7S7tQ

   Criticism is welcome, specially as this is my third animation ever...

--
Jaime


Post a reply to this message

From: Warp
Subject: Re: Alphabet blocks
Date: 25 Sep 2012 11:27:03
Message: <50619507@news.povray.org>
Jaime Vives Piqueres <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote:
>    Here is a little animation I created while testing the Bullet Physics
> Playground by Koppi. This tool generated 333 .pov scenes, which I
> processed with Regexxer to replace the simple boxes by my own
> block-letter objects. Apart from this, and setting up a simple room
> environment, all I did was adding some trigonometry to the camera
> transformations to get a "not-too-mechanical" movement.

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFWYgB7S7tQ

>    Criticism is welcome, specially as this is my third animation ever...

Quite cool, although it does show the still-existing limitations of
physics simulation engines. While the blocks are moving faster and there's
a lot of things going on, it looks realistic; however, when they are almost
still, they do not act naturally because they keep moving slowly, like they
were alive. In real life such blocks would settle rapidly and keep
completely still afterwards.

-- 
                                                          - Warp


Post a reply to this message

From: Jaime Vives Piqueres
Subject: Re: Alphabet blocks
Date: 25 Sep 2012 13:33:19
Message: <5061b29f$1@news.povray.org>
On 25/09/12 13:27, Warp wrote:
> Quite cool, although it does show the still-existing limitations of
> physics simulation engines. While the blocks are moving faster and
> there's a lot of things going on, it looks realistic; however, when
> they are almost still, they do not act naturally because they keep
> moving slowly, like they were alive. In real life such blocks would
> settle rapidly and keep completely still afterwards.
>

  Yes, that's seems at first glance, but I know still very little, and
I'm sure that it can be minimized by using correct values for mass,
friction, etc... I just used the defaults from Koppi's playground. So,
that's next thing to investigate...

--
Jaime


Post a reply to this message

From: Ive
Subject: Re: Alphabet blocks
Date: 25 Sep 2012 14:22:51
Message: <5061be3b@news.povray.org>
Am 25.09.2012 08:50, schrieb Jaime Vives Piqueres:
>
>    Criticism is welcome, specially as this is my third animation ever...

 From an longtime moviegoer perspective I would show the tower of blocks 
at the beginning *much* longer to create some tension by the viewer on 
what might happen - even if he already expects it to fall ;)
As Warp already mentioned the long "aftershock" movement looks 
unrealistic but on the other hand I did find the "living blocks" quite 
funny.

-Ive


Post a reply to this message

From: Jaime Vives Piqueres
Subject: Re: Alphabet blocks
Date: 27 Sep 2012 06:26:58
Message: <5063f1b2$1@news.povray.org>
On 25/09/12 16:21, Ive wrote:
> From an longtime moviegoer perspective I would show the tower of
> blocks at the beginning *much* longer to create some tension by the
> viewer on what might happen - even if he already expects it to fall
> ;) As Warp already mentioned the long "aftershock" movement looks
> unrealistic but on the other hand I did find the "living blocks"
> quite funny.

   Thanks, Ive... I did a new one, addressing the "living blocks" problem
(mitigated a bit by using proper mass, friction and restitution), and
also adding the "tension moment" you suggested. The base simulation is
different too, but this time the "radiosity flickering" seems more
noticeable... I used +HR, but still there is some randomness from frame
to frame. Any ideas?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjTmB9_mbzY


--
Jaime


Post a reply to this message

From: Warp
Subject: Re: Alphabet blocks
Date: 27 Sep 2012 10:11:43
Message: <5064265f@news.povray.org>
Jaime Vives Piqueres <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote:
>    Thanks, Ive... I did a new one, addressing the "living blocks" problem
> (mitigated a bit by using proper mass, friction and restitution), and
> also adding the "tension moment" you suggested.

Now they somehow behave like they are made of rubber rather than wood.

-- 
                                                          - Warp


Post a reply to this message

From: Jaime Vives Piqueres
Subject: Re: Alphabet blocks
Date: 27 Sep 2012 11:04:23
Message: <506432b7$1@news.povray.org>
On 27/09/12 12:11, Warp wrote:
> Now they somehow behave like they are made of rubber rather than
> wood.
>

   Perhaps I raised the friction too much, in an attempt to make them
settle soon...

--
Jaime


Post a reply to this message

From: clipka
Subject: Re: Alphabet blocks
Date: 27 Sep 2012 15:12:00
Message: <50646cc0$1@news.povray.org>
Am 27.09.2012 08:26, schrieb Jaime Vives Piqueres:

>    Thanks, Ive... I did a new one, addressing the "living blocks" problem
> (mitigated a bit by using proper mass, friction and restitution), and
> also adding the "tension moment" you suggested. The base simulation is
> different too, but this time the "radiosity flickering" seems more
> noticeable... I used +HR, but still there is some randomness from frame
> to frame. Any ideas?

+HR doesn't help for frame-to-frame problems, it just makes sure that 
the /same/ scene renders identically each time.

There's really only one way around radiosity flicker, and that's 
higher-quality radiosity settings. (From my experience with static 
scenes, a deeper pretrace often helps a lot.)


Post a reply to this message

From: Jaime Vives Piqueres
Subject: Re: Alphabet blocks
Date: 27 Sep 2012 21:12:37
Message: <5064c145$1@news.povray.org>
On 27/09/12 17:11, clipka wrote:
> +HR doesn't help for frame-to-frame problems, it just makes sure
> that the /same/ scene renders identically each time.

   Admittedly, I didn't finish reading the description... :(

> There's really only one way around radiosity flicker, and that's
> higher-quality radiosity settings. (From my experience with static
> scenes, a deeper pretrace often helps a lot.)

   Oh, no... I was trying to avoid raising the quality, as it renders
already somewhat slow.

   But I had a wild idea... I think someone suggested it sometime ago,
but I don't know if anyone ever tested it: saving/loading radiosity from
one frame to frame, by using both +RFI and +RFO for every frame. I just
did a quick test, and the flickering seems much less noticeable... but
perhaps is my imagination: will render the final animation tonight and
report back.

--
Jaime


Post a reply to this message

From: Alain
Subject: Re: Alphabet blocks
Date: 28 Sep 2012 02:19:30
Message: <50650932@news.povray.org>
Le 27/09/12 5:12 PM, Jaime Vives Piqueres a écrit :
> On 27/09/12 17:11, clipka wrote:
>> +HR doesn't help for frame-to-frame problems, it just makes sure
>> that the /same/ scene renders identically each time.
>
>    Admittedly, I didn't finish reading the description... :(
>
>> There's really only one way around radiosity flicker, and that's
>> higher-quality radiosity settings. (From my experience with static
>> scenes, a deeper pretrace often helps a lot.)
>
>    Oh, no... I was trying to avoid raising the quality, as it renders
> already somewhat slow.
>
>    But I had a wild idea... I think someone suggested it sometime ago,
> but I don't know if anyone ever tested it: saving/loading radiosity from
> one frame to frame, by using both +RFI and +RFO for every frame. I just
> did a quick test, and the flickering seems much less noticeable... but
> perhaps is my imagination: will render the final animation tonight and
> report back.
>
> --
> Jaime
>
>
>
>

I did try that once, but must have badly chosen my animation. It caused 
a crash as the radiosity data kept growing to exceede the capacity of my 
computer...


Post a reply to this message

Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 7 Messages >>>

Copyright 2003-2008 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.