 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 24.09.2015 um 08:23 schrieb Mike Horvath:
>>> Tried again with a plain white background. The shadows look pretty
>>> filthy.
>>
>> Technically that doesn't seem to be the shadows, but the radiosity.
>>
>> Are you sure you're using UberPOV's "no_cache" keyword in the radiosity
>> settings?
>
> I used your radiosity settings exactly, and it does look better. Except
> for the grainy speckles in the shadowed regions where radiosity is working.
See? Just listen to old people's advice ;)
As for the grainy speckles, those have the pleasant property that they
can be reduced simply by throwing more computing time at it. UberPOV's
anti-aliasing mode 3 is your friend there.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Horvath <mik### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> I used your radiosity settings exactly, and it does look better. Except
> for the grainy speckles in the shadowed regions where radiosity is working.
What is that device attached to the attic roof on the right end?
;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/24/2015 5:28 PM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> Mike Horvath <mik### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> I used your radiosity settings exactly, and it does look better. Except
>> for the grainy speckles in the shadowed regions where radiosity is working.
>
> What is that device attached to the attic roof on the right end?
>
> ;-)
>
>
Well, young man. In the days before satellites... :-P
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/24/2015 11:51 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 24.09.2015 um 08:23 schrieb Mike Horvath:
>
>>>> Tried again with a plain white background. The shadows look pretty
>>>> filthy.
>>>
>>> Technically that doesn't seem to be the shadows, but the radiosity.
>>>
>>> Are you sure you're using UberPOV's "no_cache" keyword in the radiosity
>>> settings?
>>
>> I used your radiosity settings exactly, and it does look better. Except
>> for the grainy speckles in the shadowed regions where radiosity is working.
>
> See? Just listen to old people's advice ;)
>
> As for the grainy speckles, those have the pleasant property that they
> can be reduced simply by throwing more computing time at it. UberPOV's
> anti-aliasing mode 3 is your friend there.
>
I do not have this time, unfortunately. I have about a hundred models,
and each render is taking me 16+ hours.
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Horvath <mik### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
keep at it mikey,
:)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'legospace_phtons.png' (337 KB)
Preview of image 'legospace_phtons.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi(gh)!
On 19.11.2015 19:13, Melody wrote:
> Mike Horvath <mik### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>
>
> keep at it mikey,
> :)
>
This very set I had when I was 10 years old, back in 1979! And also the
LL 918, and, somewhat later, the LL 928 (my younger brother had the LL 924)!
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Hi(gh)!
>
> On 19.11.2015 19:13, Melody wrote:
>> Mike Horvath <mik### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>>
>>
>> keep at it mikey,
>> :)
>>
> This very set I had when I was 10 years old, back in 1979! And also the
> LL 918, and, somewhat later, the LL 928 (my younger brother had the LL
> 924)!
Interestingly enough, 891 (442 in the US) was one of just two sets from
the European 1979 generation of space series my brother and I did /not/
own (not counting baseplate sets).
My very first classic space set was the 889 radar vehicle; from that day
on, the percentage of non-space sets among our subsequent new
acquisitions dropped to almost zero, and never recovered.
LL 928 will probably always be my favorite LEGO space set, rivaled only
by 6929 (which we never owned).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
