On 05/04/2011 05:40 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> How is the image progressing?
>
> Thomas
>
>
I've had to abandon the notion of having the character up close to the 
camera, and this version is the result of a typo, that sent me in 
another direction. Now I have to come up with something different to 
work the pov logo into the scene (it was in the orb the character is 
holding) ... also thinking of getting rid of the stairs.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'ndi.png' (516 KB)

Preview of image 'ndi.png'

Are there any plans to add that scene to the portfolio of POV-Ray sample 
scenes? If so, then the Poser models are most likely a no-go due to 
licensing issues. Definitely can't distribute the textures, and most 
likely can't distribute meshes either, even in already posed form.

Post a reply to this message

On 09/05/2011 12:51 PM, clipka wrote:
> Are there any plans to add that scene to the portfolio of POV-Ray sample
> scenes? If so, then the Poser models are most likely a no-go due to
> licensing issues. Definitely can't distribute the textures, and most
> likely can't distribute meshes either, even in already posed form.

I don't know if Jim had intended to release the whole scene but I doubt 
that the Poser model would be included as it and the textures are about 
12 Megs in a zipped format.
I've just read the EULA and you are right, permission would be required 
to make the meshes and texture maps available.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht 
news:4dc7c98c@news.povray.org...
> I've had to abandon the notion of having the character up close to the
> camera, and this version is the result of a typo, that sent me in
> another direction. Now I have to come up with something different to
> work the pov logo into the scene (it was in the orb the character is
> holding) ... also thinking of getting rid of the stairs.

Not bad  ;-)

I like the new positions of the figures. They achieve a better balance in 
the overall perception of the scene. I understand your doubts about the 
stairs. However, getting rid of them will leave the wall quite featureless. 
You will need something to break the monotony, e.g. a gate to the outside or 
to another courtyard. Is the fountain in the courtyard coming back? That 
would influence what you intend to do with the wall.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 05/10/2011 04:02 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> "Jim Holsenback"<jho### [at] povrayorg>  schreef in bericht
> news:4dc7c98c@news.povray.org...
>> I've had to abandon the notion of having the character up close to the
>> camera, and this version is the result of a typo, that sent me in
>> another direction. Now I have to come up with something different to
>> work the pov logo into the scene (it was in the orb the character is
>> holding) ... also thinking of getting rid of the stairs.
>
> Not bad  ;-)
>
> I like the new positions of the figures. They achieve a better balance in
> the overall perception of the scene. I understand your doubts about the
> stairs. However, getting rid of them will leave the wall quite featureless.
> You will need something to break the monotony, e.g. a gate to the outside or
> to another courtyard. Is the fountain in the courtyard coming back? That
> would influence what you intend to do with the wall.
>
> Thomas

I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do 
some work on the ceiling in the background structure. The radiosity is 
reaching a bit to far back into the room, it needs to be a bit darker to 
make it appear deeper that it really is. The wall's look OK because it's 
pigment is only 20% of the outside color, maybe a gradient on the 
ceiling will get me where I want it to be. I also found a couple of 
light leaks that were causing some hot spots.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'ndi.png' (556 KB)

Preview of image 'ndi.png'

Le 17/05/2011 02:35, Jim Holsenback a écrit :
> maybe a gradient on the ceiling

What about a ceiling made of wood, floorboards, seen from under.
The load-bearing wall is the external one (and its parallel wall in
shadow). But the floors above the ground would logically not be made of
stone but of floorboards. Only the load-bearing parts need to be of
stone or beam.

A set of perpendicular beam ( perpendicular to the running wall/arches)
would support shorter floorboards which would be parallel to the wall.

-- 
Software is like dirt - it costs time and money to change it and move it
around.

Just because you can't see it, it doesn't weigh anything,
and you can't drill a hole in it and stick a rivet into it doesn't mean
it's free.

Post a reply to this message

"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht 
news:4dd1c2da@news.povray.org...
> I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do
> some work on the ceiling in the background structure. The radiosity is
> reaching a bit to far back into the room, it needs to be a bit darker to
> make it appear deeper that it really is. The wall's look OK because it's
> pigment is only 20% of the outside color, maybe a gradient on the
> ceiling will get me where I want it to be. I also found a couple of
> light leaks that were causing some hot spots.
>
>
Sorry to say this, but I feel a bit uneasy about this set up. It is too 
symmetrical to my taste, every element repeating. The previous set up was 
less monotonous as the walls were different frome ach other. I liked that 
better and it generated some tension in the image, even with the blank wall 
part where a few narrow windows would also have been possible I realise now.

As for the ceiling, Le Forgeron suggests an interesting solution. I would 
suggest myself to build arches over the corridor,instead of main cross 
beams.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 05/17/2011 04:24 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> "Jim Holsenback"<jho### [at] povrayorg>  schreef in bericht
> news:4dd1c2da@news.povray.org...
>> I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do
>> some work on the ceiling in the background structure. The radiosity is
>> reaching a bit to far back into the room, it needs to be a bit darker to
>> make it appear deeper that it really is. The wall's look OK because it's
>> pigment is only 20% of the outside color, maybe a gradient on the
>> ceiling will get me where I want it to be. I also found a couple of
>> light leaks that were causing some hot spots.
>>
>>
> Sorry to say this, but I feel a bit uneasy about this set up. It is too
> symmetrical to my taste, every element repeating. The previous set up was
> less monotonous as the walls were different frome ach other. I liked that
> better and it generated some tension in the image, even with the blank wall
> part where a few narrow windows would also have been possible I realise now.
>
> As for the ceiling, Le Forgeron suggests an interesting solution. I would
> suggest myself to build arches over the corridor,instead of main cross
> beams.
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
lol .. you know after i posted i started feeling the same way. the 
repetition appeals to my ocd and i have to keep reminding myself not to 
fall into that trap. i spent sometime exploring some arch images and i 
think i get the drift of what you both were talking about ... thanks for 
the nudge

Post a reply to this message

On 17/05/2011 1:35 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>
>
> I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do
> some work on the ceiling in the background structure.

How about googling "Jacobean ceiling patterns" for some ideas.

And do you want another model?

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 05/17/2011 12:24 PM, Stephen wrote:
> On 17/05/2011 1:35 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>>
>>
>> I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do
>> some work on the ceiling in the background structure.
>
> How about googling "Jacobean ceiling patterns" for some ideas.

ah ... I've seen a few of those in my travels, maybe I can find an image 
to use for a normal map ;-)

>
> And do you want another model?
>

eventually ... but as you can see my progress on this project has slowed 
to something less than that of a snail

Post a reply to this message