Hi all,

I promised to show some results of my experimentation with proximity 
patterns, using my cenotaph building. The attached image shows three 
results, from top to bottom:

- Patina2 macro (Rune Johansen/James Coons; 2003/2004). The pattern gives an 
interesting result for the building but it renders veeeerrrryyy slowly. The 
image took more than three hours to complete.

- df3prox macro (Edouard Poor; 2009). Something rather similar to Patina2. 
Parsing the present df3 file took about half an hour but the render was very 
fast. I believe that I have not yet got the parameters correctly as there 
are still some artifacts showing.

- fastprox3 macro (Sam Benge; 2009). Very fast parsing/rendering. I added 
here an adapted version of the wear pattern provided by Sam in his demo file 
to get a more interesting result. The settings especially of the pigment in 
the pigment_map block seems to be more tricky than with the other patterns. 
I am not really sure why.

What do you think?

-- 
All the best,

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'boullee_cenotaphe_proxpat.jpg' (190 KB)

Preview of image 'boullee_cenotaphe_proxpat.jpg'

Hi
I tested Edouard's df3prox test scene with some meshes
I don't see such artifacts.
I use :
#declare resolution = <30,30,30>;
#declare num_samples = 100;
#declare sample_radius_fraction = 4;

I still have to test the others methods :-)

Marc




message de news: 4aa0da0c@news.povray.org...
> Hi all,
>
> I promised to show some results of my experimentation with proximity
> patterns, using my cenotaph building. The attached image shows three
> results, from top to bottom:
>
> - Patina2 macro (Rune Johansen/James Coons; 2003/2004). The pattern gives 
> an
> interesting result for the building but it renders veeeerrrryyy slowly. 
> The
> image took more than three hours to complete.
>
> - df3prox macro (Edouard Poor; 2009). Something rather similar to Patina2.
> Parsing the present df3 file took about half an hour but the render was 
> very
> fast. I believe that I have not yet got the parameters correctly as there
> are still some artifacts showing.
>
> - fastprox3 macro (Sam Benge; 2009). Very fast parsing/rendering. I added
> here an adapted version of the wear pattern provided by Sam in his demo 
> file
> to get a more interesting result. The settings especially of the pigment 
> in
> the pigment_map block seems to be more tricky than with the other 
> patterns.
> I am not really sure why.
>
> What do you think?
>
> -- 
> All the best,
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'DF3Prox_Ajax_Aphrodite.jpg' (47 KB)

Preview of image 'DF3Prox_Ajax_Aphrodite.jpg'

"Thomas de Groot" <tDOTdegroot@interDOTnlANOTHERDOTnet> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I promised to show some results of my experimentation with proximity
> patterns, using my cenotaph building. The attached image shows three
> results, from top to bottom:
>
> - Patina2 macro (Rune Johansen/James Coons; 2003/2004). The pattern gives an
> interesting result for the building but it renders veeeerrrryyy slowly. The
> image took more than three hours to complete.
>
> - df3prox macro (Edouard Poor; 2009). Something rather similar to Patina2.
> Parsing the present df3 file took about half an hour but the render was very
> fast. I believe that I have not yet got the parameters correctly as there
> are still some artifacts showing.
>
> - fastprox3 macro (Sam Benge; 2009). Very fast parsing/rendering. I added
> here an adapted version of the wear pattern provided by Sam in his demo file
> to get a more interesting result. The settings especially of the pigment in
> the pigment_map block seems to be more tricky than with the other patterns.
> I am not really sure why.
>
> What do you think?

"Oh dear, mine looks terrible"

What are the parameters you're using (for the macro and for the textures)? It
might be able to be improved a little.

I am interested in the rendering speed, as I was hoping that, at least, would be
faster than other methods. Can you give some more timings?

Cheers,
Edouard.

Post a reply to this message

"m_a_r_c" <jac### [at] wanadoofr> wrote:
> Hi
> I tested Edouard's df3prox test scene with some meshes
> I don't see such artifacts.
> I use :
> #declare resolution = <30,30,30>;
> #declare num_samples = 100;
> #declare sample_radius_fraction = 4;
>
> I still have to test the others methods :-)

Oh wow - those look great! Cool!

Because the DF3 pattern runs over a regular spaced grid, I suspect it works much
better on more irregularly shaped objects like those meshes, rather than regular
objects like sphere's etc. Or at least with less tuning required...

Cheers,
Edouard.

Post a reply to this message

web.4aa0ec379d317c83c83e2c410@news.povray.org...
>
> Oh wow - those look great! Cool!
It's your work lol, I only dropped those meshs in your test scene, tuned the 
bronze texture at my taste and modified your inc file.
the defaut values declared there (as mesh_mode=false) are not overridden by 
those declared in the pov file.


> Because the DF3 pattern runs over a regular spaced grid, I suspect it 
> works much
> better on more irregularly shaped objects like those meshes, rather than 
> regular
> objects like sphere's etc. Or at least with less tuning required...

That's what I suspected too :-)

Marc

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas de Groot" <tDOTdegroot@interDOTnlANOTHERDOTnet> wrote:
> What do you think?

Thomas, to me Edouard's has the best overall coverage and look (aside from the
rather obvious radial pattern). I really like the dome arches you've added. The
original bald dome design was rather bland. Nice work!

-Rob

Post a reply to this message

"Edouard" <pov### [at] edouardinfo> schreef in bericht 
news:web.4aa0e4149d317c83c83e2c410@news.povray.org...
>
> "Oh dear, mine looks terrible"

Probably the settings....

>
> What are the parameters you're using (for the macro and for the textures)? 
> It
> might be able to be improved a little.

#declare interpolation_mode = 2;
#declare resolution = <80,80,80>;
#declare num_samples = 60;
#declare sample_radius_fraction = 4;
//Proximity_SetBailoutValue( 30 )
#declare add_noise = true;

I used your demo pigment_pattern code without changes;
as pigment_map I used:
        pigment_map {
            [0.30 color rgb <0.837064, 0.814426, 0.762936>]
            [0.50 color rgb <0.625, 0.5729, 0.454396>]
            [0.60 color rgb <0.3854, 0.395833, 0.1875>]
        }

Not being entirely sure about what I am doing, I am sure that you can 
improve on this :-)  However, Marc might be right about the difficluty in 
tuning a regular surface.

>
> I am interested in the rendering speed, as I was hoping that, at least, 
> would be
> faster than other methods. Can you give some more timings?

I did not really note those down. What I remember is that apart from the 
parsing of the df3 which took about 30 minutes, the render was finished in 
no more than 4 minutes on a dual core machine.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Robert McGregor" <rob### [at] mcgregorfineartcom> schreef in bericht 
news:web.4aa0f5a69d317c834726e92b0@news.povray.org...
> Thomas, to me Edouard's has the best overall coverage and look (aside from 
> the
> rather obvious radial pattern). I really like the dome arches you've 
> added. The
> original bald dome design was rather bland. Nice work!
>

Thanks Robert. The original design indeed needed a bit of extra attention. 
Possibly, I shall add or change some more things.

To me also Edouard's is approaching closest to what I want. Sam's seems to 
be the most difficult to tune (perhaps due to my stupidity though) with or 
without the extra wear given to the pigment_pattern.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"m_a_r_c" <jac### [at] wanadoofr> schreef in bericht 
news:4aa0e453@news.povray.org...
> Hi
> I tested Edouard's df3prox test scene with some meshes
> I don't see such artifacts.
> I use :
> #declare resolution = <30,30,30>;
> #declare num_samples = 100;
> #declare sample_radius_fraction = 4;
>
> I still have to test the others methods :-)
>

I feel ashamed when I see this indeed :-)  Maybe, as you say below, a 
regular surface is more difficult to tune right...

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

OK, Edouard, it seems that I exagerated my settings. Going back to basics, I 
get a much better result as the image may testify.

Using these settings now:

  #declare interpolation_mode = 2;
 #declare resolution = <30,30,30>;
 #declare num_samples = 100;
 #declare sample_radius_fraction = 2;
//Proximity_SetBailoutValue( 30 )

All other things equal. Parsing of the df3 took a couple of minutes; render 
in about 2.5 minutes.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'boullee_cenotaphe_adapted_df3prox.jpg' (43 KB)

Preview of image 'boullee_cenotaphe_adapted_df3prox.jpg'