 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas van der Veen wrote:
>
> Very nice indeed!!!
Thanks.
> Is it just me or are the sphere's getting smaller? and if so why?
>
Because the camera is changed.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 13 Aug. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmx de> wrote in
news:3D9C2E2C.A083D6FB@gmx.de:
> Because the camera is changed.
Ah I see, any particular reason for doing that?
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas van der Veen wrote:
>
> > Because the camera is changed.
>
> Ah I see, any particular reason for doing that?
>
If not either the first one would heve beeen very small or in the last one
the more distant parts would be cut off.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 13 Aug. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote in
news:3D9C3273.6ACB53A9@gmx.de:
> If not either the first one would heve beeen very small or in the last
> one the more distant parts would be cut off.
I just had a good look at the pictures and I realised that's the case. DUH.
But thanks for answering anyway!
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
> I have been rendering these during the last weeks in several parts, didn't
> record the render time, but it was quite long.
>
> Posters of the full size renders are available on zazzle:
>
> http://www.zazzle.com/posters/gallery/product.asp?product%5Fid=70012958
> http://www.zazzle.com/posters/gallery/product.asp?product%5Fid=70012962
> http://www.zazzle.com/posters/gallery/product.asp?product%5Fid=70012964
>
> The simulation is done with my mechanics simulation patch (still in work,
> see the animations in p.b.a.) - guess how many spheres...
Let us know when the animated posters are available :)
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> guess how many spheres...
4060 + 1?
Tom.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tom Bates wrote:
>
> > guess how many spheres...
>
> 4060 + 1?
>
Wrong.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 13 Aug. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> The simulation is done with my mechanics simulation patch (still in work,
> see the animations in p.b.a.) - guess how many spheres...
Assuming a) a perfect tetrahedral setup with 30 layers and
b) I can count (not necessarily a good bet)
Then I would hazard a guess at 4960 small spheres and one big one, and
possibly a sky_sphere too :)
Jamie.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jamie Davison wrote:
>
> Assuming a) a perfect tetrahedral setup with 30 layers and
> b) I can count (not necessarily a good bet)
>
> Then I would hazard a guess at 4960 small spheres and one big one, and
> possibly a sky_sphere too :)
Wrong.
The mistake you are making is assuming the bottom front line you see is
the bottom line of balls of the original tetraeder - it isn't because the
whole thing is falling.
In fact there are 5985 spheres.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 13 Aug. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > Assuming a) a perfect tetrahedral setup with 30 layers and
> > b) I can count (not necessarily a good bet)
> >
> > Then I would hazard a guess at 4960 small spheres and one big one, and
> > possibly a sky_sphere too :)
>
> Wrong.
Objection Yeronner!
Going by the assumptions I elaborated, I think I was correct. You never
said I had toplay by your rules :P
> The mistake you are making is assuming the bottom front line you see is
> the bottom line of balls of the original tetraeder - it isn't because the
> whole thing is falling.
>
> In fact there are 5985 spheres.
Bah! I'm not playing this game any more! <grin>
Jamie.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
