A dragonfly! Ok, not a good dragonfly, but that's what it is. Yes, I
do need to improve a lot of things.

  Now to start on the next round... Hmm... "Great Inventions"...
<thinks>...

  ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'dragonfly.jpg' (74 KB)

Preview of image 'dragonfly.jpg'

I like the eyes.  :)

Skip

Post a reply to this message

St. wrote:
> A dragonfly! Ok, not a good dragonfly, but that's what it is. Yes, I
> do need to improve a lot of things.
> 
>   Now to start on the next round... Hmm... "Great Inventions"...
> <thinks>...
> 
>   ~Steve~

Cool!
-- 
Respectfully,
Dan P
http://<broken link>

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:406ec274@news.povray.org...

Looks a little mechanical. Were you going for that?

I'd say a little work on the legs and you've got it nailed.

 -Shay

Post a reply to this message

"Shay" <sah### [at] simcopartscom> wrote in message
news:4072b99e$1@news.povray.org...
>
> "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message
news:406ec274@news.povray.org...
>
> Looks a little mechanical. Were you going for that?

  No, but it looked ok in my original image, (dusk). The shape is
designed on proper shapes of dragonflies, so I was happy with that,
but at the time, I was under pressure time-wise to put something to
the left of the image. The wings have a glass texture and there are
about 120 of them to simulate flapping wings. It kind of works, but
for the life of me, I wouldn't know how to get rid of that solid bit
in the middle of the wings.

>
> I'd say a little work on the legs and you've got it nailed.

  Thanks, and you're dead right about the legs, but I know I can model
them properly.

   ~Steve~



>
>  -Shay
>
>

Post a reply to this message

120 glass wings??? just what is your max_trace_level... something like 
241 or more? And, how long was the render?
You may be better with only one set of wings and some contained media to 
simulate the motion blur.

Alain

St. nous apporta ses lumieres ainsi en ce 2004/04/06 16:04... :

>  No, but it looked ok in my original image, (dusk). The shape is
>designed on proper shapes of dragonflies, so I was happy with that,
>but at the time, I was under pressure time-wise to put something to
>the left of the image. The wings have a glass texture and there are
>about 120 of them to simulate flapping wings. It kind of works, but
>for the life of me, I wouldn't know how to get rid of that solid bit
>in the middle of the wings.
>
>  
>
>  Thanks, and you're dead right about the legs, but I know I can model
>them properly.
>
>   ~Steve~
>
>
>  
>
>

Post a reply to this message

"Skip Talbot" <sta### [at] uiucedu> wrote in message
news:406f84c5$1@news.povray.org...
> I like the eyes.  :)

   Hey thanks, modeled using Wings. Create a deformed sphere, smooth a
few times, select 'faces', extrude 'normal' a little way out, rotate
'normal' faces left or right as required, 'smooth' the results of
that, unselect and 'smooth' the whole thing. That's how I got the
scales on my dragon.

   ~Steve~


>
> Skip
>
>

Post a reply to this message

"Alain" <aze### [at] qwertygov> wrote in message
news:407347ef$1@news.povray.org...
> 120 glass wings???

 Yes,
            \/
  30____0____30
  30____0____30
            0
            0

just what is your max_trace_level... something like
> 241 or more?

 No, 2. How did you come to that conclusion?

>And, how long was the render?

  For this image? About 41 minutes.


> You may be better with only one set of wings and some contained
media to
> simulate the motion blur.

I'll give this a go, thank you.

~Steve~



>
> Alain
>
> St. nous apporta ses lumieres ainsi en ce 2004/04/06 16:04... :
>
> >  No, but it looked ok in my original image, (dusk). The shape is
> >designed on proper shapes of dragonflies, so I was happy with that,
> >but at the time, I was under pressure time-wise to put something to
> >the left of the image. The wings have a glass texture and there are
> >about 120 of them to simulate flapping wings. It kind of works, but
> >for the life of me, I wouldn't know how to get rid of that solid
bit
> >in the middle of the wings.
> >
> >
> >
> >  Thanks, and you're dead right about the legs, but I know I can
model
> >them properly.
> >
> >   ~Steve~
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

Post a reply to this message

St. nous apporta ses lumieres ainsi en ce 2004/04/06 21:37... :

>"Alain" <aze### [at] qwertygov> wrote in message
>news:407347ef$1@news.povray.org...
>  
>
>>120 glass wings???
>>    
>>
>
> Yes,
>            \/
>  30____0____30
>  30____0____30
>            0
>            0
>
>just what is your max_trace_level... something like
>  
>
>>241 or more?
>>    
>>
>
> No, 2. How did you come to that conclusion?
>  
>
If your wings have any thickness, one going in, one going out of every 
wings, plus one for every reflections, it goes up very fast. If the 
wings are bicubic patches or other no thickness objects, one per wing, 
plus any reflection.

Alain

>  
>
>>And, how long was the render?
>>    
>>
>
>  For this image? About 41 minutes.
>
>
>  
>
>>You may be better with only one set of wings and some contained
>>    
>>
>media to
>  
>
>>simulate the motion blur.
>>    
>>
>
>I'll give this a go, thank you.
>
>~Steve~
>
>
>  
>

Post a reply to this message

"Alain" <aze### [at] qwertygov> wrote in message
news:40740d14$1@news.povray.org...
> St. nous apporta ses lumieres ainsi en ce 2004/04/06 21:37... :
>
> >"Alain" <aze### [at] qwertygov> wrote in message
> >news:407347ef$1@news.povray.org...
> >
> >
> >>120 glass wings???

> > Yes,
> >
> >>241 or more?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > No, 2. How did you come to that conclusion?
> >
> >
> If your wings have any thickness, one going in, one going out of
every
> wings, plus one for every reflections, it goes up very fast. If the
> wings are bicubic patches or other no thickness objects, one per
wing,
> plus any reflection.

      Ah, I see, thanks. So if I'm correct, you expected a longer time
than 41minutes based on what I said about the glass wings?

    Ok, I'm at the stage now where I've tried some sample renders with
the max_trace_level set at 35, and from what I can see, the wings look
pretty good, with a slight density in the centre of the wings, (which
I would expect). I want to render this through the night at 800x600,
a+0.0, because when I stopped the renders, they were at line 200 and
that was nearly two hours later, so I can see at least an 8 hour
render.

    My question is though: If the max_trace_level goes higher, is it
worth it for a better quality image? Would there be a significant
difference if I raised by say, 50% or more?

  BTW, I've modeled the legs to how they should be, and introduced a
little bit of yellow body colouring. It should look pretty good. To be
posted soon.  :)

     ~Steve~




>
> Alain

Post a reply to this message