 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The amazing thing is that there is a full(ish) pin-table on the smaller
one...
Everything was translated, rotated, scaled in PoV except for the main
table which obviously was produced in Wings. Wings can't do the 'whole scene
thing' unless you have some kind of super computer. It was a real headache
for six weeks work. 157 includes - (renamed *A,*B,*C, for the additional
tables). Needed lots more texture procedures though - dirt, grime, wear,
etc.
Better motion blur on the balls too, (advice with this?)
Hope you like the concept though.
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'imm2.jpg' (148 KB)
Preview of image 'imm2.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Rick Measham
Subject: Re: Pinball fun... "Imminent"
Date: 3 Feb 2005 21:51:15
Message: <4202E323.80600@nomail>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
St. wrote:
> Hope you like the concept though.
Looks good .. only thing is the colors feel a bit oversaturated .. most
of the pinball machines I've used are darker more brooding colors. (2c)
Favorite feature: the airplane flypast!
Cheers!
Rick
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
St. nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2005-02-03 21:29:
> The amazing thing is that there is a full(ish) pin-table on the smaller
> one...
>
> Everything was translated, rotated, scaled in PoV except for the main
> table which obviously was produced in Wings. Wings can't do the 'whole
> scene thing' unless you have some kind of super computer. It was a real
> headache for six weeks work. 157 includes - (renamed *A,*B,*C, for the
> additional tables). Needed lots more texture procedures though - dirt,
> grime, wear, etc.
>
> Better motion blur on the balls too, (advice with this?)
>
> Hope you like the concept though.
>
> ~Steve~
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
About the motion blur, that's cartoon motion trail that you are using! That's no
motion blur.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Alain" <ele### [at] netscape net> wrote in message
news:420355fa$1@news.povray.org...
> About the motion blur, that's cartoon motion trail that you are using!
> That's no motion blur.
Thanks for that. Now, how do you do motion blur then?
>
> Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Thanks for that. Now, how do you do motion blur then?
Without MegaPOV, you've got to render several images with the object in
question moving, and then average those images. There's probably a more
precise model, as I guess that a real photo would receive most information
during the initial opening of the camera shot and gather less and less when
it reaches the end, as the photo-cells have already saturated or such. For a
digital camera though, my description should be sufficient. :-)
--
"Tim Nikias v2.0"
Homepage: <http://www.nolights.de>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
St. wrote:
> additional tables). Needed lots more texture procedures though - dirt,
> grime, wear, etc.
That would be very nice... I also agree with Rick about the colors.
> Better motion blur on the balls too, (advice with this?)
Hmmm... as it is just a sphere, perhaps a cylinder with a faked
texture would do the job.
> Hope you like the concept though.
Great concept! And very detailed work (I liked the "recursive"
touch). If it is not taking too much long to render already, I will
increase a bit the rad quality. That plus working on the textures, can
lead to an even more impressive image.
--
Jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Nikias wrote:
>> Thanks for that. Now, how do you do motion blur then?
>
> Without MegaPOV, you've got to render several images with the object
> in question moving, and then average those images. There's probably a
> more precise model, as I guess that a real photo would receive most
> information during the initial opening of the camera shot and gather
> less and less when it reaches the end, as the photo-cells have
> already saturated or such. For a digital camera though, my
> description should be sufficient. :-)
No, it should be sufficient for film too. A shutter speed of 1/100 will
give you twice the exposure as a shutter speed of 1/200, on both film and
digital. Of course this is assuming you don't over-expose any areas.
What *might* make a difference is the speed that the shutter opens. If it
opens slowly relative to the "shutter speed" then the "weighting" of the
instantaneous image will be lower at the beginning and the end when the
shutter is only partially open. But seeing as shutters can open at 1/4000
second, I doubt it would make much visible difference.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Looks like a fun table to play.
I extually made a few pinball tables in pov and make them playable with
visual pinball.
look here:
http://emkaah.tripod.com/
If you know some VBS you could probably made this table playable too.
Would be fun :) .
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
news:42036176@news.povray.org...
>
> What *might* make a difference is the speed that the shutter opens. If it
> opens slowly relative to the "shutter speed" then the "weighting" of the
> instantaneous image will be lower at the beginning and the end when the
> shutter is only partially open. But seeing as shutters can open at 1/4000
> second, I doubt it would make much visible difference.
>
Don't forget that curtain shutters don't expose the whole picture surface at
the same moment: at high speed, it is merely a narrow slot between 1st and
2nd curtain that sweeps across the film window.
BTW isn't the eye model with its Persistence Of Vision better than
photographic model?
Image fades smoothly from retina in roughly 1/25 sec so last image should be
stronger than 1st
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Marc Jacquier wrote:
> news:42036176@news.povray.org...
>>
>> What *might* make a difference is the speed that the shutter opens.
>> If it opens slowly relative to the "shutter speed" then the
>> "weighting" of the instantaneous image will be lower at the
>> beginning and the end when the shutter is only partially open. But
>> seeing as shutters can open at 1/4000 second, I doubt it would make
>> much visible difference.
>>
> Don't forget that curtain shutters don't expose the whole picture
> surface at the same moment: at high speed, it is merely a narrow slot
> between 1st and 2nd curtain that sweeps across the film window.
> BTW isn't the eye model with its Persistence Of Vision better than
> photographic model?
> Image fades smoothly from retina in roughly 1/25 sec so last image
> should be stronger than 1st
Very true, I've never thought of that before!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
