 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Who can guess, what is this? Image has been scaled down with Gimp
(original 1024x768), but I'm NOT going to render it again for 800x600 or
smaller (maybe 1600x1200 for background usage), while rendering this one
took over 173 hours...
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethis zbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'image.jpg' (153 KB)
Preview of image 'image.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Looks kinda like a wormhole as shown in the Stargate TV series...
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Eero Ahonen" <aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid> wrote in message
news:435d4ba6@news.povray.org...
> Who can guess, what is this? Image has been scaled down with Gimp
> (original 1024x768), but I'm NOT going to render it again for 800x600 or
> smaller (maybe 1600x1200 for background usage), while rendering this one
> took over 173 hours...
>
> --
> Eero "Aero" Ahonen
> http://www.zbxt.net
> aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
>
Could be a chromatograph of force interactions between a high velocity BB
and the gun barrel....
-or-
Could be a REAL fancy marble!
Is this gonna be another really long thread??
Kenneth Hutson
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Is this gonna be another really long thread??
It's the view from Thistledown! Or possibly a straw descending into lime
cordial...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Who can guess, what is this? Image has been scaled down with Gimp
> (original 1024x768), but I'm NOT going to render it again for 800x600
> or smaller (maybe 1600x1200 for background usage), while rendering
> this one took over 173 hours...
I don't care what it is, it's pretty. Could it be animated?
--
There was a young man from Japan, . o O ( http://surreal.istic.org/ )
Who wrote verse that just wouldn't scan; ( It's like a DEATH CIRCUS! )
When they said, "But the thing Has to go with a swing," GPG 885b170d
He said, "Yes, but I like to make the final line last as long as I can."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think it's a spider's eye view of being flushed down a bath plughole.
On drugs.
Very pretty! I think an animation might be illegal, however...
Bill
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Daniel Hulme wrote:
>> Who can guess, what is this? Image has been scaled down with Gimp
>> (original 1024x768), but I'm NOT going to render it again for 800x600
>> or smaller (maybe 1600x1200 for background usage), while rendering
>> this one took over 173 hours...
> I don't care what it is, it's pretty. Could it be animated?
>
At over 173 hours a frame, what century would the animation be done in?
--
~Mike
Things! Billions of them!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> I think it's a spider's eye view of being flushed down a bath plughole.
> On drugs.
:)
It's actually an empty glasstube inside reflective chrometube, you know
difference {
{ cylinder } //outside limits
{ cylinder } //inside limits
{ sphere } //rounding at one end
{ sphere } //rounding at other end
}
-style, with glass one the radiuses are set to a bit littler than on the
chrome one. The glasstube's pigment is a greenish, bozo'd color_map.
Besides that, there's 4 different colour spotlight aimed to cross at the
front of the camera. Naturally there's media and radiosity involved
also. It's still lacking focal blur, which I think I'd like (focused at
the visible end of the tube).
> Very pretty! I think an animation might be illegal, however...
Not illegal, but extremely timetaking. With smaller resolution, without
antialiasing etc. rendering time would surely be possible to drop under
100 hours/frame (I'm not giving off the radiosity - it makes MUCH at
this image), but still, 100 hours is over 4 days and nights, with 25fps
(PAL) the first second would take 100 days...
I shall see what I can do for the rendering time. While rendering this
image my workstation was not a single second dedicated to Pov, so it
might also help "a bit".
> Bill
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Perhaps render time could be reduced by eliminating the unseen sphere.
Kenneth Hutson
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken Hutson wrote:
> Perhaps render time could be reduced by eliminating the unseen sphere.
> Kenneth Hutson
>
>
I wouldn't say it's unseen (especially while animated) - one of the
scene bases is reflection. But I'll try that, too. I'm now rendering
1600x1200 with focal blur for my desktop background, so it'll take a while.
10:02:45 Rendering line 163 of 1200, 15846 rad. samples
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
