 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The patch simulates decrease of reactive chemicals in film
emulsion during exposure. The areas that have received more
light react less than other areas. Usefull for high contrast
scenes as it brings up the dark areas and limit bright areas.
I have combined aperture, film speed, and exposure time into
one exposure variable which goes into global_settings. The images
show the difference between normal and exposed image. I'll test
it some more to see if it works nicely with anti-aliasing and
focal blur.
_____________
Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'exposure.jpg' (39 KB)
Preview of image 'exposure.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Can we have a few more demos scenes - I for one fond this very interesting!
--
Rick
Kitty5 NewMedia http://Kitty5.co.uk
POV-Ray News & Resources http://Povray.co.uk
TEL : +44 (01270) 501101 - FAX : +44 (01270) 251105 - ICQ : 15776037
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.416 / Virus Database: 232 - Release Date: 06/11/2002
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
3DCD3221.F40A6CBA@luxlab.com...
> The patch simulates decrease of reactive chemicals in film
> emulsion during exposure. The areas that have received more
> light react less than other areas. Usefull for high contrast
> scenes as it brings up the dark areas and limit bright areas.
Very interesting and useful patch. Looks great.
Waiting to see more examples
Txemi Jendrix
http://www.txemijendrix.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
That sounds great. What about digi-cams? Are they inferior in this field?
Regards,
Hugo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Johannes Dahlstrom
Subject: Re: Film exposure simulation patch
Date: 9 Nov 2002 14:32:32
Message: <3dcd62d0@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kari Kivisalo wrote:
>
> The patch simulates decrease of reactive chemicals in film
> emulsion during exposure. The areas that have received more
> light react less than other areas. Usefull for high contrast
> scenes as it brings up the dark areas and limit bright areas.
Heh, I made a patch just similar to yours a couple months ago... My first
Povray modification :) You're using the 1-exp(-x) function, right?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Johannes Dahlstrom wrote:
>
> Heh, I made a patch just similar to yours a couple months ago...
And you kept in the desk drawer?
> You're using the 1-exp(-x) function, right?
It seems to be the simplest usable function for this purpose.
_____________
Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hugo wrote:
>
> What about digi-cams? Are they inferior in this field?
It seems that camera manufacturers aren't forthcoming about
the on-board image processing features. One transfer curve
I saw was definitely film-like which is kind of natural :)
_____________
Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Johannes Dahlstrom
Subject: Re: Film exposure simulation patch
Date: 9 Nov 2002 16:03:04
Message: <3dcd7808@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kari Kivisalo wrote:
> And you kept in the desk drawer?
>
I was quite fond of it and was of course going to publish it here, but then
Kevin Loney came up with his own patch just before I was about to do so.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Johannes Dahlstrom wrote:
>
> I was quite fond of it and was of course going to publish it here, but
> then Kevin Loney came up with his own patch just before I was about to
> do so.
His patch was going in different direction so I decided to make
this one.
_____________
Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3dcd5f8f$1@news.povray.org>, "Hugo" <hua### [at] post3 teledk>
wrote:
> That sounds great. What about digi-cams? Are they inferior in this field?
Not really sure what you are asking...the CCD will have a different
response curve than film or the human eye. Some of them might do
filtering to end up with something closer to film, or just something
that looks better. The design of the CCD element probably matters as
well.
They can't really be inferior or superior to POV, since they have quite
different information. POV has essentially unbounded float triples with
the "real" light intensities, cameras have fixed point values with the
raw output of CCD elements, restricted to a certain range.
--
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
