|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
El 01/04/16 a las 22:45, Sven Littkowski escribió:
> This is the most realistic ocean I have seen so far! Will you
> publish the scene source code?
Thanks... of course, sources will be published once I finish fiddling
with it.
> Just the sky is pink and some dust does not allow to see very far, so
> it seems.
Well, the sky is from CIE_Skylight.inc, and yes, I've never been very
satisfied with the pinkish coloring at horizon. On the first image is
less noticeable as I lowered the white point to 4000K.
The dust/haze is on purpose, to hide the fact that the sea is a mesh
with a finite resolution.
--
jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Very good! :)
Thanks!
> Now show the coast.
If I do, don't expect to see any breaking wave there... As Thomas
said, it must be feasible, but just acquiring the knowledge to do this
procedurally will consume the rest of my lifetime.
> From the camera.
I don't know any other way to trace a scene except from the camera. ;)
> Such foreshortening
??? ..I guess the translator got confused here.
--
jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> That is something I have unsuccessfully tried to do with
> isosurfaces. Should be possible but...
>
Yes, it should be possible, but the complexity behind the phenomenon is
mind-blowing.
--
jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jaime Vives Piqueres <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote:
> > Very good! :)
>
> Thanks!
>
> > Now show the coast.
>
> If I do, don't expect to see any breaking wave there... As Thomas
> said, it must be feasible, but just acquiring the knowledge to do this
> procedurally will consume the rest of my lifetime.
>
I speak about simulation in graphics editors.
You speak about programming and mathematician.
> > From the camera.
>
> I don't know any other way to trace a scene except from the camera. ;)
>
> > Such foreshortening
>
> ??? ..I guess the translator got confused here.
>
>
> --
> jaime
Sorry!
The camera is located ashore.
I wanted to see this coast.
That it was clear, I attached the picture, but you already don't understand.
My picture: where camera?
The look captures the coast on which there is a camera.
But, the essence is clear already. You way: Programming and mathematician.
NOT RMB, LMB, Middle and scroll, only keyboard. :):):)
I said earlier that Povray can't bend a surface, using normal as it does the
Blender.
You well repeated that ocean which I showed. But, it is very difficult method
for users the Blender. :)))))
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I speak about simulation in graphics editors.
Then that has nothing to do with POV-Ray... from that point of view,
it doesn't matter what POV-Ray can do, you just export the final mesh
and render it with a suitable material/media.
> The camera is located ashore. I wanted to see this coast. That it was
> clear, I attached the picture, but you already don't understand.
I did understand, but wondered what you wrote in russian that got
translated as "foreshortening".
> You well repeated that ocean which I showed. But, it is very
> difficult method for users the Blender. :)))))
As I said above, your exporter users should be making the ocean
surface by blender means (i.e.:
https://www.blender.org/manual/modeling/modifiers/simulate/ocean.html).
In my opinion, your job should only consist on providing good materials
on the POV-Ray export.
Anyhow, if you wanted to let your users to use POV-Ray as a modeler in
this case, you could always use the HF_Square() macro to export the
height_field function as a mesh, but I wonder how would you allow them
preview that in Blender.
--
jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/2/2016 3:17 AM, Nekar Xenos wrote:
> On 2016/04/01 07:36 PM, Stephen wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> That I believe. I spent weeks trying to get a good result using Tek's
>>>> isosurface, not very well. :(
>>>>
>>>> http://www.tc-rtc.co.uk/portfolio/Stephen/366/index.html
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nice idea, but yes, the foam got a bit messy... ;)
>>>
>>
>> And that was the best of the pick. :-(
>>
>>
> I think this actually looks really good. I like the style.
Thank you. You are one of the few. :-)
> But not for
> realism though.
>
I am not known for my realism. ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jaime Vives Piqueres <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote:
> > I speak about simulation in graphics editors.
>
> Then that has nothing to do with POV-Ray... from that point of view,
> it doesn't matter what POV-Ray can do, you just export the final mesh
> and render it with a suitable material/media.
>
Some render have the option "displace"
Look:
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/message/%3Cweb.56ff96e9c8daa117a3e03fe0%40news.povray.org%3E/#%3Cweb.56ff
96e9c8daa117a3e03fe0%40news.povray.org%3E
> > The camera is located ashore. I wanted to see this coast. That it was
> > clear, I attached the picture, but you already don't understand.
>
> I did understand, but wondered what you wrote in russian that got
> translated as "foreshortening".
>
The online translator puts equality sign "foreshortening" = "perspective"
:)))))
> > You well repeated that ocean which I showed. But, it is very
> > difficult method for users the Blender. :)))))
>
> As I said above, your exporter users should be making the ocean
> surface by blender means (i.e.:
> https://www.blender.org/manual/modeling/modifiers/simulate/ocean.html).
> In my opinion, your job should only consist on providing good materials
> on the POV-Ray export.
>
Yes.
> Anyhow, if you wanted to let your users to use POV-Ray as a modeler in
> this case, you could always use the HF_Square() macro to export the
> height_field function as a mesh, but I wonder how would you allow them
> preview that in Blender.
>
If macro creates the file (with mesh2), then I can load it in a scene.
> --
> jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 4/2/2016 3:17 AM, Nekar Xenos wrote:
> > But not for
> > realism though.
> >
>
> I am not known for my realism. ;-)
>
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
I am not interested in realism. But, I want that the viewer understood that I
drew.
:))))
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/2/2016 12:01 PM, LanuHum wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>> On 4/2/2016 3:17 AM, Nekar Xenos wrote:
>
>>> But not for
>>> realism though.
>>>
>>
>> I am not known for my realism. ;-)
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards
>> Stephen
>
> I am not interested in realism. But, I want that the viewer understood that I
> drew.
> :))))
>
That is the best that I can hope for.
I know my place. ;)
(A tribute to the late Ronnie Corbett.)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 4/2/2016 12:01 PM, LanuHum wrote:
> > Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> >> On 4/2/2016 3:17 AM, Nekar Xenos wrote:
> >
> >>> But not for
> >>> realism though.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I am not known for my realism. ;-)
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Stephen
> >
> > I am not interested in realism. But, I want that the viewer understood that I
> > drew.
> > :))))
> >
>
> That is the best that I can hope for.
> I know my place. ;)
>
> (A tribute to the late Ronnie Corbett.)
>
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
Long ago in shop I photographed a pattern? (pictures,images?) reproduction.
I don't see it realistic, but, I would like to simulate it for animation.
For me it is very beautiful!
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'sea_pic.jpg' (176 KB)
Preview of image 'sea_pic.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |