 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8-10-2015 23:12, Stephen wrote:
> On 10/8/2015 9:56 PM, Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann wrote:
>> I want to model my now-defunct bathroom scales
>
> Sorry I can't help with your media problem, Yadgar.
> But you reminded me of a jape I did a few years back.
> I had been working on a crane upgrading the load indicator. I took the
> old 100 ton scale and put it in my bathroom scales. My wife's screams
> could be heard from miles away.
> I did not know she could punch that hard. But it was worth it. ;-)
>
Now, that was not nice to do sir! Poor woman!
You made my day :-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8-10-2015 22:56, Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann wrote:
> What do I wrong? Should I try absorbing media instead?
>
You certainly might. I am not sure about the physics of glass but maybe
it is a combination of scattering and absorption you need?
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/9/2015 7:55 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Now, that was not nice to do sir! Poor woman!
>
> You made my day :-)
Thanks Thomas.
I reminded her about it last night and she laughed again. But she did
not punch me. I've been forgiven. :-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 15-10-08 17:12, Stephen a écrit :
> On 10/8/2015 9:56 PM, Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann wrote:
>> I want to model my now-defunct bathroom scales
>
> Sorry I can't help with your media problem, Yadgar.
> But you reminded me of a jape I did a few years back.
> I had been working on a crane upgrading the load indicator. I took the
> old 100 ton scale and put it in my bathroom scales. My wife's screams
> could be heard from miles away.
> I did not know she could punch that hard. But it was worth it. ;-)
>
An 100 TON scale? In a bathroom? That's just plain mean !
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 15-10-08 16:56, Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann a écrit :
> Hi(gh)!
>
> I want to model my now-defunct bathroom scales and started with the
> glass pane - when viewed edge on, it should display a dark bluish green.
> I used scattering media to achieve this (first attached image) but then
> noticed that the media color almost disappeared when viewed against a
> non-black background (second image). I tried to fix this by adding an
> interior_texture (without reflection) to the material statement, but
> then the media color was even less visible (third image).
>
> What do I wrong? Should I try absorbing media instead?
>
> See you in Khyberspace!
>
> Yadgar
I would use fade_colour, fade_distance and fade_power for that purpose.
A side bonus is a much faster rendering.
If you absolutely want to use some media, then, absorbing media is the
kind that you want.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 09.10.2015 um 08:58 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> On 8-10-2015 22:56, Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann wrote:
>> What do I wrong? Should I try absorbing media instead?
>>
>
> You certainly might. I am not sure about the physics of glass but maybe
> it is a combination of scattering and absorption you need?
Nope.
There's virtually no scattering in modern regular glass - except maybe
for some dirt on the surface, but that's obviously not some interior effect.
Ancient glass did often have impurities that would scatter light, but as
a result the material would appear misty or even opaque at reasonable
thickness (because that's what scattering ultimately does to a medium).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/9/2015 8:32 PM, Alain wrote:
> Le 15-10-08 17:12, Stephen a écrit :
>> On 10/8/2015 9:56 PM, Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann wrote:
>>> I want to model my now-defunct bathroom scales
>>
>> Sorry I can't help with your media problem, Yadgar.
>> But you reminded me of a jape I did a few years back.
>> I had been working on a crane upgrading the load indicator. I took the
>> old 100 ton scale and put it in my bathroom scales. My wife's screams
>> could be heard from miles away.
>> I did not know she could punch that hard. But it was worth it. ;-)
>>
>
> An 100 TON scale? In a bathroom? That's just plain mean !
Bows :-)
My wife is quite thin so it was an obvious joke.
I also took a "Cold Work" permit book home as well, but chickened out
giving that to her. She always had a list of jobs for me to do after
being offshore for two weeks. In the end I thought that it was pushing it.
In case you don't know UK electrical plugs and sockets look like this:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/5f/1b/a9/5f1ba98a5d187b3f733e8c867d8898eb.jpg
It was fun watching my brother-in-law try to fit this plug into a
standard socket.
http://www.flameport.com/electric_museum/plugs_13A_non_standard/walsall_gauge_13a_plug.jpg
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
=?UTF-8?B?SsO2cmcgJ1lhZGdhcicgQmxlaW1hbm4=?= <yazdegird@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi(gh)!
>
> I want to model my now-defunct bathroom scales and started with the
> glass pane - when viewed edge on, it should display a dark bluish green.
> I used scattering media to achieve this (first attached image) but then
> noticed that the media color almost disappeared when viewed against a
> non-black background (second image). I tried to fix this by adding an
> interior_texture (without reflection) to the material statement, but
> then the media color was even less visible (third image).
>
> What do I wrong? Should I try absorbing media instead?
>
> See you in Khyberspace!
>
> Yadgar
I concur with Clipka and Alain. Use fade_power 1001, fade_color, and
fade_distance in the media block. Absorbing media may be easier conceptually,
but it is slower and (in my experience) artifact prone.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9-10-2015 21:56, clipka wrote:
> Am 09.10.2015 um 08:58 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>> On 8-10-2015 22:56, Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann wrote:
>>> What do I wrong? Should I try absorbing media instead?
>>>
>>
>> You certainly might. I am not sure about the physics of glass but maybe
>> it is a combination of scattering and absorption you need?
>
> Nope.
>
> There's virtually no scattering in modern regular glass - except maybe
> for some dirt on the surface, but that's obviously not some interior effect.
>
> Ancient glass did often have impurities that would scatter light, but as
> a result the material would appear misty or even opaque at reasonable
> thickness (because that's what scattering ultimately does to a medium).
>
Ah! Thanks for answering my cancelled post. ;-) I thought mine
irrelevant after I discovered you had a much better option to give.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi(gh)!
On 09.10.2015 01:45, clipka wrote:
> Am 08.10.2015 um 22:56 schrieb Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann:
> Think physics: Why does the effect you wish to model occur in nature?
>
> You will find that it is not due to scattering, but due to absorption.
Meanwhile, I tried absorption on my own (see attachmealso with bevnts),
and now it looks believable, at least to me (the glass pane now also has
bevelled edges)
Note that I multiplied the absorption color with 7, otherwise the
coloring would have turned out too faint.
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download '2015-10-09 korona scales, take 18.jpg' (21 KB)
Download '2015-10-09 korona scales, take 22.jpg' (14 KB)
Preview of image '2015-10-09 korona scales, take 18.jpg'
Preview of image '2015-10-09 korona scales, take 22.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
