 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Another fight won. This train is going somewhere, but I tell you -
complex cast-iron parts like that cylinder block are no fun to model in
CSG when you want proper beveling...
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'steam.jpg' (102 KB)
Preview of image 'steam.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> Another fight won. This train is going somewhere, but I tell you -
> complex cast-iron parts like that cylinder block are no fun to model in
> CSG when you want proper beveling...
Wow, this model is turning out to be quite the technical achievement!
What are your plans for texturing and lighting?
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stbenge schrieb:
> Wow, this model is turning out to be quite the technical achievement!
> What are your plans for texturing and lighting?
Not sure yet. As for texturing, I'll probably try for a "dirty from
traveling, but easily cleaned" look.
As for the lighting, I'm not sure even whether it will be a day or night
shot; it will primarily be either moon- or sunlit, though a night scene
might employ a few artificial light sources in addition.
In either case, radiosity is a must of course...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
> stbenge schrieb:
>
> > Wow, this model is turning out to be quite the technical achievement!
> > What are your plans for texturing and lighting?
>
> Not sure yet. As for texturing, I'll probably try for a "dirty from
> traveling, but easily cleaned" look.
>
> As for the lighting, I'm not sure even whether it will be a day or night
> shot; it will primarily be either moon- or sunlit, though a night scene
> might employ a few artificial light sources in addition.
>
> In either case, radiosity is a must of course...
This is looking really good, I can appreciate the time/effort going into this
and can't wait to see the finished/textured version. If you are like me you have
several scene ideas in mind both with nice and clean and dirty textures,
different colour trains etc... I just hope you manage to finish them off.
Not to be too picky but the spokes (especially on the front wheels) are showing
through slightly in the gap between the outer edge of the wheel and the inner
part. Is this correct from the blue print you have?
I am really impressed..
Sean
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
s.day schrieb:
> Not to be too picky but the spokes (especially on the front wheels) are showing
> through slightly in the gap between the outer edge of the wheel and the inner
> part. Is this correct from the blue print you have?
They're just not finished. The wheels where among the very first parts I
did (right after the rails); the dimensions were still mostly guessing
by then (the blueprints I have for /this/ particular engine do not show
much more information than the total diameter), and the approach I used
to get the geometry the way I wanted was still in an experimental stage.
I recently gave the hubs an overhaul when adding the crank pins, and
also re-did the tyres on that occasion, but the spokes and rims are
still pending update, so they just don't perfectly match up with the
tyres ATM.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I recently gave the hubs an overhaul when adding the crank pins, and
> also re-did the tyres on that occasion, but the spokes and rims are
> still pending update, so they just don't perfectly match up with the
> tyres ATM.
You also need to add counter-weights on the wheels, otherwise, the
weight of the crank pins will be unbalanced, and would result in serious
operational difficulties...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"clipka" <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote in message
news:4abba0d0@news.povray.org...
> Another fight won. This train is going somewhere, but I tell you -
> complex cast-iron parts like that cylinder block are no fun to model in
> CSG when you want proper beveling...
WOW ... (top drawer) very nice!
I'm sure that my notion of beveling being a waste of time has been laid to
rest for good! It really completes the look.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
. schrieb:
> You also need to add counter-weights on the wheels, otherwise, the
> weight of the crank pins will be unbalanced, and would result in serious
> operational difficulties...
Don't worry, I won't forget about those. I'll even remember to make them
bigger on the main drivers. There's still a LOT that waits to be added
though; ATM I'm busy with the drive and valve gear.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> Another fight won. This train is going somewhere, but I tell you -
> complex cast-iron parts like that cylinder block are no fun to model in
> CSG when you want proper beveling...
Impressive tech achievement, no doubt! I'm curious about the beveled
chimneys... are they isosurfaces? How many LOC so far?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis schrieb:
> Impressive tech achievement, no doubt! I'm curious about the beveled
> chimneys... are they isosurfaces? How many LOC so far?
Thanks! I guess with "beveled chimneys" you mean the sandbox and steam
dome "humps": They're actually blobs (like the smokestack), with no more
than a dozen components each.
Lines of code? Uh, let's see...:
Main file: 1551 LOC
Beveled geometry framework: 1292 LOC
Drive/Valve gear geometry: 713 LOC
Materials: 247 LOC
Config include file: 58 LOC
------
Total 3861 LOC
(That's total lines in the files; I didn't bother subtracting the number
of blank or comment lines.)
I guess the geometry framework saves me a HUGE number of code lines (but
most importantly, it saves me from wrecking my brain on a daily basis :-)).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
