 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think I've improved this quite a bit. I have abandoned the 'rain' idea as
it's out of the scope of this project.
Enjoy!
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'AtmosphericMedia.jpg' (49 KB)
Preview of image 'AtmosphericMedia.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bryan Valencia" <pov### [at] spamgourmet com> wrote:
> I think I've improved this quite a bit. I have abandoned the 'rain' idea as
> it's out of the scope of this project.
> Enjoy!
hey,
it looks nice whit the media, but the textures are a bit the same. you
should try some different textures for the pipes and pilars to get some
contrast.
roelof,
http://jwstolk.xs4all.nl/roelof/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Excuse me for coming in late on this Bryan. I saw one or two previous
renderings before and I forget now what you're ultimate goal might be
about-- if there was any, that is.
Well, I'm going to say something about this now. It looks to me like there
needs to be greater emphasis on the light and media interaction. I could be
way off on what you're really doing, but if I were you I would probably
increase the brightness of the lighting coming from both the grid and walls.
And in the process make the media brighter, too.
There probably should be very dark, nearly black, regions where the light is
either in shadow or very weakly lit. The image seems to suffer the age-old
affliction of being washed out. At least it does so here on my LCD screen so
it could be different if seen elsewhere or just a matter of personal
perception of what looks right. Even with the multiple light sources I'd
still expect to see black areas along the pipes for example.
On closer inspection I see that beyond the hatchway door it looks dimly lit
but with the same light as that which comes from above. Maybe you have a
wall back there but it looks wrong, like you're media might be filling it up
way behind there. Just making guesses outloud.
Also, area_light would probably be a good idea since those wall lights
shouldn't be like point sources.
Bob Hughes
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bob Hughes wrote:
What Bob said and I would also encourage you to play with fade_distance
fade_power on the interior wall lights
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks for all your suggestions.
The point of the project was to create a scene with visible light streaming
into the scene (scattering media example). I wanted to create a kind of
gloomy place where there was sunshine outside, but you can't get there LOL.
On top is not an area-light, it's actually intednded to be sunlight. It was
really dark before I added the interior lights. I suppose I could re-render
without them and have the radiosity try to pick up more of the detail at a
higher quality setting.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bryan Valencia" <pov### [at] spamgourmetcom> wrote in message
news:42dbf2c3$1@news.povray.org...
>
> The point of the project was to create a scene with visible light
> streaming
> into the scene (scattering media example). I wanted to create a kind of
> gloomy place where there was sunshine outside, but you can't get there
> LOL.
Ah yes, okay, so it isn't intended to be focused on being a wet sewer with
emphasis on the surface texturing. I thought maybe your message subject line
could just be a part or step in the direction you were headed with this.
> On top is not an area-light, it's actually intednded to be sunlight. It
> was
> really dark before I added the interior lights. I suppose I could
> re-render
> without them and have the radiosity try to pick up more of the detail at a
> higher quality setting.
Jim suggested light fading so I'll say media attenuation (along with
absorption) might be something to do with it, too, if not already tried.
I was trying to recreate a quick version of your scene here and found myself
using unconventional numbers for the lights and radiosity (with
ambient_light 0). But then many people do that, so who's to say what is
conventional?
Anyway... I couldn't get good dark shadowy places unless I used radiosity
brightness 0.5, assumed_gamma 1.5 and lights with colors of rgb 3 (sun) and
rgb 2 (bulbs), the inside lights use fade_distance 0.25 fade_power 2 and the
tunnel is 2 units across and 10 units long. Not always as easy to do
something as it might seem at first. I probably got way off track.
; )
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I posted the scene at "povray.text.scene-files". Knock yourself out :)
"Bob Hughes" <bob### [at] charternet> wrote in message
news:42dbf8ab$1@news.povray.org...
> "Bryan Valencia" <pov### [at] spamgourmetcom> wrote in message
> news:42dbf2c3$1@news.povray.org...
> I was trying to recreate a quick version of your scene here...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bryan Valencia" <pov### [at] spamgourmetcom> wrote in message
news:42dbfa81@news.povray.org...
>I posted the scene at "povray.text.scene-files". Knock yourself out :)
Thanks Bryan.
Couple things I noticed:
"intervals 10". The default media method adjusts intervals itself, unless
you really want to change it anyhow. Could be slowing the render down.
"assumed_gamma 0.8". That would explain the washed out appearance since 1.0
is usually recommended. Although, that's not much different.
I shortened the fade_distance to half, or 1.5, then raised the color up to
3.0 for those wall lights and the tunnel is much darker; also with the
assumed_gamma at 1. Raised the media scattering color up to 0.0025, as well,
so it's smokier. Smokey might not be your idea for this scene but it sure is
more visible.
The main thing is apparently those lights, though. Really makes a difference
changing those.
You might find it necessary to increase the media samples some to prevent
choppiness of the media, especially since it's going through that grid.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>On top is not an area-light, it's actually intednded to be sunlight.
I usually use an area light for sunlight (4x4) is good enough. Because if
you look at the shadows cast by bright sunlight, they actually have diffuse
edges. A hard edge looks unnatural. (looking at sunlight on my desk as I
type).
Joanne
http://www.onewhiteraven.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
