 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here is the latest version of my Shaker-inspired scene.
I'm still not 100% happy with the lighting. I also think there should be
more shadows than there are, and I'm not exactly sure what I need to do
about that. I'm guessing that it's a Radiosity issue. Perhaps I should
mess around more with some of the various settings. Any advice in that area
would be appreciated. Mastering radiosity is an art-form of its own. There
are also some radiosity issues behind the table on the wall. I didn't
notice that until now, but I think I can clean that up.
Now that I've expanded the height of the frame, I also feel that the scene
needs more "stuff" in it. I'm just not exactly sure what. A picture
hanging on the far wall might work, but unfortunately, that would kill a
Shaker scene, since they generally did not believe in hanging pictures. I
have a couple ideas, but feel free to make suggestions.
This was actually scaled down from the original which is here:
http://www.beantoad.com/newimages/shaker16.jpg
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'Shaker16small.jpg' (97 KB)
Preview of image 'Shaker16small.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jeremy M. Praay" <jer### [at] questsoftware cmo> wrote in message
news:439f1339@news.povray.org...
> Here is the latest version of my Shaker-inspired scene.
>
> I'm still not 100% happy with the lighting. I also think there should be
> more shadows than there are, and I'm not exactly sure what I need to do
> about that.
Very nice Jeremy, I'm sure I've seen that kind of light before. My only
concern is the lack of shadow from the legs of the furniture. Maybe you
could put a light source, (with the same variables as your sunlight, but
diffuse it some), just inside the window but lower?
The whole image gives a very 'warm' feeling to me.
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
For some reason, it looks like the table and chair are "floating" above the
wooden floor. Also, the floor itself doesn't look right- it looks too
"clean". Maybe peturbating the floor normals with a bump map, or switching
to a heightfield for the floor?
Chuck Hoffmann
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Chuck Hoffmann" <cha### [at] comcastnet> wrote in message
news:439f2c71$1@news.povray.org...
> For some reason, it looks like the table and chair are "floating" above
> the wooden floor. Also, the floor itself doesn't look right- it looks too
> "clean". Maybe peturbating the floor normals with a bump map, or switching
> to a heightfield for the floor?
>
I did some of those things, but I think they are too small to be noticeable,
resulting in a very smooth floor. The floor is actually an iso-surface
(from the iso_wood includes), so it should be easy to adjust.
As for the floating appearance, that's what I was getting at regarding the
shadows and lighting. Something isn't quite right, but I haven't been able
to figure out what needs to be adjusted yet. And with radiosity, it's
difficult to make a change, try it, make another change, try it (on and on),
simply because it sucks up so much time. *sigh*
Thank you for your input!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:439f1e64@news.povray.org...
>
> Very nice Jeremy, I'm sure I've seen that kind of light before. My only
> concern is the lack of shadow from the legs of the furniture. Maybe you
> could put a light source, (with the same variables as your sunlight, but
> diffuse it some), just inside the window but lower?
Thank you. :-)
That's something I have considered. I used that trick in my POVComp entry,
but that was mostly to clean up some radiosity artifacts. I'm going to play
around with Radiosity for awhile (probably adjusting the count and
error_bound initially) then see where things go.
> The whole image gives a very 'warm' feeling to me.
>
:-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I'm still not 100% happy with the lighting.
I'd like to see more of the woven rush seat on the chair - could you direct
the light down and to the right a bit?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi Jeremy,
The increased verticality together with the zoom-out makes a huge
improvement in my view. Basically it transforms the picture from
an image I was really struggling with to one I can savor. The more
complete sense of the space has the paradoxical effect of enhancing what
I think you were trying to get with your original close cropping: a
relishing of detail. The increased sense of the space and the more
complete view of objects in relation to it compounds the ways the scene
can be appreciated. The different textures play off of one another
increasing their beauty, the light plays in a real atmosphere, vagaries
of object placement create a sense of habitation. But I personally
enjoy the starkness of the scene and would hate to see it too
overburdened with objects. I think it is shaping up very beautifully now.
-Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
btw I took a little gander at beantoad but I see you neither show an
email nor have any sort of comments box
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jeremy M. Praay" <jer### [at] questsoftwarecmo> schreef in bericht
news:439f1339@news.povray.org...
> Here is the latest version of my Shaker-inspired scene.
>
> I'm still not 100% happy with the lighting. I also think there should be
> more shadows than there are, and I'm not exactly sure what I need to do
> about that. I'm guessing that it's a Radiosity issue. Perhaps I should
> mess around more with some of the various settings. Any advice in that
area
> would be appreciated. Mastering radiosity is an art-form of its own.
There
> are also some radiosity issues behind the table on the wall. I didn't
> notice that until now, but I think I can clean that up.
>
> Now that I've expanded the height of the frame, I also feel that the scene
> needs more "stuff" in it. I'm just not exactly sure what. A picture
> hanging on the far wall might work, but unfortunately, that would kill a
> Shaker scene, since they generally did not believe in hanging pictures. I
> have a couple ideas, but feel free to make suggestions.
>
> This was actually scaled down from the original which is here:
> http://www.beantoad.com/newimages/shaker16.jpg
>
>
>
>
I would not consider *more stuff* here. I have the impression that the scene
should remain rather empty. perhaps the suggestion on the right of a
cupboard or something? Just the shadow on the wall...
Yes the shadow of table and chair feet is annoying. That is a radiosity
issue I believe. Not sure how to correct that. I am also still learning by
trial and error how to use it correctly in each scene...
Strangely enough, I just had the vision of an old woman, who was sitting on
the chair, contemplating the sunset, and who got up and stepped away just
before you took the snapshot!
There is an atmosphere of an invisible presence in this scene, other than
the beholder.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote in message
news:43a0ba12@news.povray.org...
>
> btw I took a little gander at beantoad but I see you neither show an email
> nor have any sort of comments box
Yes, I've been meaning to add that, but then I start thinking that I should
update my site, and if I'm going to update my site, I should also (etc)...
Perhaps you know how that goes...
There actually is a link to my home email on my DALMAC page
http://www.beantoad.com/Dalmac/default.htm. But most POVers would never
find that.
Changing the subject, I saw this picture on Gena's site:
http://propro.ru/go/Album/us/images/triple.jpg. It reminds me of your
dardevle scenes...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
