 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 17-2-2016 13:18, Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
> The world of POV-Ray crystallography is on fire this week... after the
> discovery of Thomasite, now it's the turn of Vivesite. ;)
>
That's it! One thing maybe to watch out for is the irregular normal
pattern on the sides. I think one should distinguish between the 'growth
pattern' of the crystals and the 'inclusions' within the crystals like
residual liquids. Of course Vivesite is a totally different matter ;-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Fantastic. I've been wanting to know how to do this for years, but good crystal
> geometry has been elusive.
Thanks... my solution was in fact very easy. The crystal geometry is
very simple, just 14 triangles for each crystal. The growth orientation
is controlled by the surface normals, and the widths and heights of each
one are just random.
> How high do you have to set the max_trace_level?
Only 9... I found increasing it was an overkill.
--
jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Phantastic!
>
> Good to see something new from you, Jaime. First I thought, it's hdr
> lighting, but with this artifacts...
>
Thanks... yes, it has an hdr image as background, but it doesn't
contributes to lighting as I'm not using radiosity at the moment. The
lighting is just a single point light at the top, which matches the
lighting on the cave probe from openfootage.net. The problem with the
artifacts is that I used a looks_like object way too bright.
--
jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
El 18/02/16 a las 09:01, Thomas de Groot escribió:
> That's it! One thing maybe to watch out for is the irregular normal
> pattern on the sides. I think one should distinguish between the 'growth
> pattern' of the crystals and the 'inclusions' within the crystals like
> residual liquids. Of course Vivesite is a totally different matter ;-)
>
Yes, the normal is tricky... I used a simple "crackle solid" with
turbulence for now.
--
jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This is amazing stuff. I love those mineral pictures!!!
On 17.02.2016 07:18, Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
> The world of POV-Ray crystallography is on fire this week... after the
> discovery of Thomasite, now it's the turn of Vivesite. ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
There are so many different types of crystals out there, so I am looking
forward to see a whole lot of new crystal and rock images to come here!
This is really breath-taking.
On 17.02.2016 07:18, Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
> The world of POV-Ray crystallography is on fire this week... after the
> discovery of Thomasite, now it's the turn of Vivesite. ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
El 17/02/16 a las 23:55, clipka escribió:
> I guess it's worth frying a few more ;)
Thanks, but I think there is no need to fry neurons anymore: I was
doing it too complicated by creating the geometry AFTER the tracing on
to the surface. Now I'm creating the geometry at the origin and using
transforms.inc macros later... as I should have done from the start.
Typical of me, anyhow. :(
--
jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jaime Vives Piqueres <jai### [at] ignorancia org> wrote:
> First test using an isosurface as base... nice, except for some ugly
> artifacts on focal blur, due to a too strong light source.
>
> --
> jaime
I really have to unlurk for this!
This kind of thing got me into ray-tracing to begin with.
Beautiful!
Can I ask, in broad strokes, how you did this? I tend to render distances, and
haven't done much in the way of upclose and detailed work like this. Looking at
these two images I think I would like to try.
Simon.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Simon J. Cambridge" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> Can I ask, in broad strokes, how you did this? I tend to render distances, and
> haven't done much in the way of upclose and detailed work like this. Looking at
> these two images I think I would like to try.
>
OK, ignore that! I was so busy admiring the images that I missed this:
>
> The crystals are procedurally generated using triangle meshes from the
> scratch. A height_field was used to trace the 4 base points, and then
> the crystal was grown following the normal at the center point. No area
> light nor radiosity this time... but I used photons+dispersion and a
> strong focal blur.
>
I'll just go back to lurking!
Simon.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Beautiful!
Thanks!
> Can I ask, in broad strokes, how you did this?
I will publish the code this weekend, but it's really easy. Just old
& good trace() function and simple triangle geometry, placed with the
help of Reorient_Trans(). The texture is a bit tricky, but nothing too
complex really. Here is attached a test with the geometry updated to
hexagonal prisms, which look much more credible.
--
jaime
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'crystals-10.jpg' (51 KB)
Preview of image 'crystals-10.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
