Le 15-02-13 15:43, Mike Horvath a écrit :
> On 2/13/2015 3:20 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 13-2-2015 0:07, Mike Horvath wrote:
>>> On 2/12/2015 3:28 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> I have been wondering about those six circular windows. While rotating
>>>> do they not create a kind of blinking effect?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The effect is probably similar to the one experienced by farmers living
>>> near and under wind power turbines. It is probably annoying. I could
>>> replace the holes in the outer shell with a single cylindrical groove to
>>> remove the effect, but it wouldn't make structural sense.
>>
>> If structural sense is the only thing that matters (and not a view to
>> the outside) why not provide smaller holes set on different circular
>> paths between inner and outer shells, so that they do not coincide?
>>
>
> I'm not sure I understand. Having holes of any kind would still produce
> blinking I think.

The blinking effect can be reduced if the two openings set don't have 
the same number of openings.

Try 6 on the outer shell and 7 for the inner shell.


Alain

Post a reply to this message

On 13-2-2015 21:43, Mike Horvath wrote:
>
> I'm not sure I understand. Having holes of any kind would still produce
> blinking I think.

Words... difficult...
I made a little simplified image to show what I mean.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test.png' (67 KB)

Preview of image 'test.png'

I've been playing around with different scales for the habitat. I prefer 
the larger scale (left in the image). But I know there's no way I can 
render it with the quality levels turned up higher. I tried a couple 
days ago but after 2.5 hours it was still stuck in that stage between 
parsing and actually rendering. I can't spare my computer for the week 
or however long it would require to render the scene.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'gh_spinner_montage_e.png' (563 KB)

Preview of image 'gh_spinner_montage_e.png'

Am 15.02.2015 um 04:07 schrieb Mike Horvath:
> I've been playing around with different scales for the habitat. I prefer
> the larger scale (left in the image). But I know there's no way I can
> render it with the quality levels turned up higher. I tried a couple
> days ago but after 2.5 hours it was still stuck in that stage between
> parsing and actually rendering. I can't spare my computer for the week
> or however long it would require to render the scene.

Sounds like you might be hitting the physical memory limits of your 
computer, and entering the abyss of swap hell. In that case I'd wager 
even a week to be a very optimistic estimate.

Post a reply to this message

On 12/02/2015 23:09, Mike Horvath wrote:

>
> I just tried that but didn't notice much of a difference. Maybe because
> I am using parallel lights and camera?

I think that the fault is on my part. (Sorry for the delay in replying.)
I don't write my own code I use a modeller and there was a cut and paste 
problem in my last post.

The attached image shows a coloured reflection.

The bands are (R to L) Cu reflection, no colour in reflection and brick 
pattern with the mortar having a coloured reflection.

#declare SMcA_BlackCu =
texture {
   pigment {
     color rgbft <0.122,0.122,0.122,0.000,0.000>
   }

   finish {
     ambient     rgb <0.100,0.100,0.100>
     brilliance  1.000
     crand       0.000
     diffuse     0.600
     metallic    1.000
     phong       0.000
     phong_size  40.000
     specular    0.000
     roughness   0.050
     reflection {
       rgb <0.481,0.301,0.133>, rgb <0.722,0.451,0.200>
       fresnel   0
       falloff   0.000
       exponent  1.000
       metallic  0.000
     }
   }

}


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'wax03_0000.png' (545 KB)

Preview of image 'wax03_0000.png'

On 2/16/2015 9:10 AM, Stephen wrote:
> finish {
>      ambient     rgb <0.100,0.100,0.100>
>      brilliance  1.000
>      crand       0.000
>      diffuse     0.600
>      metallic    1.000
>      phong       0.000
>      phong_size  40.000
>      specular    0.000
>      roughness   0.050
>      reflection {
>        rgb <0.481,0.301,0.133>, rgb <0.722,0.451,0.200>
>        fresnel   0
>        falloff   0.000
>        exponent  1.000
>        metallic  0.000
>      }
>    }

That worked! Thanks.

Post a reply to this message

I have curved the solar panels and agridomes. They look a lot more sleek 
now.

I am also still working on a solution for the viewport flickering. I've 
at least reduced it somewhat by making the spindles in the outer shell 
thinner. I don't like how this looks, but maybe adding a few more curves 
here and there will make it look better.

Lastly, I'm still trying to figure out how to reflect sunlight onto the 
agridomes. I'm considering a paraboloid directly "above" them (from the 
standpoint of someone standing inside the agridome), but space is tight.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'gh_scene_spinner_cutaway_16.png' (310 KB)

Preview of image 'gh_scene_spinner_cutaway_16.png'

On 2/15/2015 7:48 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 15.02.2015 um 04:07 schrieb Mike Horvath:
>> I've been playing around with different scales for the habitat. I prefer
>> the larger scale (left in the image). But I know there's no way I can
>> render it with the quality levels turned up higher. I tried a couple
>> days ago but after 2.5 hours it was still stuck in that stage between
>> parsing and actually rendering. I can't spare my computer for the week
>> or however long it would require to render the scene.
>
> Sounds like you might be hitting the physical memory limits of your
> computer, and entering the abyss of swap hell. In that case I'd wager
> even a week to be a very optimistic estimate.
>

I was keeping an eye on my physical memory and I don't remember it going 
past 4GB (I have 8GB total). My swap file is also on an SSD and I don't 
remember much activity (big blinking red light on PC case) there either.

Post a reply to this message

On 2/14/2015 3:20 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 13-2-2015 21:43, Mike Horvath wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure I understand. Having holes of any kind would still produce
>> blinking I think.
>
> Words... difficult...
> I made a little simplified image to show what I mean.
>


I'm sorry but that picture still doesn't make sense to me.

Post a reply to this message

On 2/13/2015 8:59 PM, Alain wrote:
>> I'm not sure I understand. Having holes of any kind would still produce
>> blinking I think.
>
> The blinking effect can be reduced if the two openings set don't have
> the same number of openings.
>
> Try 6 on the outer shell and 7 for the inner shell.
>
>
> Alain


That's an idea, and a pretty simple one too. Thanks.

Post a reply to this message