|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: William F Pokorny
Subject: Re: hard_object, soft_object pattern 3.7.2 patch branch.
Date: 7 Mar 2017 08:12:36
Message: <58beb1c4$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/03/2017 05:43 AM, William F Pokorny wrote:
> The three attached images were created using two new patterns called
> hard_object and soft_object. They can be found in the patch branch off
> master (3.7.2) at:
>
> https://github.com/wfpokorny/povray/tree/feature/soft_objectAndhard_objectPatterns
>
One of my goals with the hard_object pattern was to get to where we
could pass an object with a defined inside to some macro and have it
create a peeling paint (PP) (or other surface-skin) isosurface for that
object without the need for extra outside steps.
While obviously not a complete/correct PP implementation, using a
superellipsoid - as Thomas did in his original peeling paint texture
postings - kinda functions. See the attached image.
The bad news is I don't think the performance is tolerable - except
perhaps to those with 32 or more fast, real cores willing to endure some
long renders...
Suspect part of the issue is in doing everything on the fly necessarily
puts the crackle pattern into the overall function being evaluated where
it was previously a separate 2D-in-evaluation outside step. Often the
case with isosurfaces; Put a handful of slightly slow things together in
a function, stick it in an isosurface and you get glacially slow. :-)
Anyway, off to do some performance profiling to see if I can nudge the
technique into the practical realm.
Bill P.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'peelingpaintb.jpg' (82 KB)
Preview of image 'peelingpaintb.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: hard_object, soft_object pattern 3.7.2 patch branch.
Date: 8 Mar 2017 02:42:47
Message: <58bfb5f7$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Very nice indeed! I am following this work in progress with strong interest.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Jörg "Yadgar" Bleimann
Subject: Re: hard_object, soft_object pattern 3.7.2 patch branch.
Date: 29 Mar 2017 04:25:44
Message: <58db6f88$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi(gh)!
Apologizing for joining the thread only now...
Am I right to assume that with the soft_object pattern, gradients
controlled by objects can be generated? If so, this would be a finally
solved issue for me!
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Now playing: A Victory of Love (Alphaville)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: William F Pokorny
Subject: Re: hard_object, soft_object pattern 3.7.2 patch branch.
Date: 29 Mar 2017 09:17:07
Message: <58dbb3d3$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/29/2017 04:25 AM, Jörg "Yadgar" Bleimann wrote:
> Hi(gh)!
>
> Apologizing for joining the thread only now...
>
> Am I right to assume that with the soft_object pattern, gradients
> controlled by objects can be generated? If so, this would be a finally
> solved issue for me!
>
> See you in Khyberspace!
>
> Yadgar
>
Yes, if I'm understanding your question. Gradients are generated from
objects with both the hard_* and soft_* pattern variants. Objects like
box, sphere, mesh etc so long as they have a defined inside.
The gradients generated behave differently & the image posted to
TinaCHeP shows the hard_object pattern as a pigment on a plane. Attached
is an example of the soft_object variant where I back way down on the
strength parameter so that the individual df3 like virtual grid can be
seen; We essentially get many small sphere gradients at the virtual
voxel centers. The containing object here is a 9 point star mesh
compliments of some code posted by "Mike the Elder" a while back.
For soft_object at strong strengths - giving better overall rounding -
most of the interior has a value of 1.0 and only the near surface
regions of the mesh have the 0-1 gradient.
Both the hard and soft variants normally tend toward 1.0 well inside the
shape. The hard variant stops at 1.0 by nature of the method used, the
soft method internally goes to well over a 1.0 value, but is currently
clamped to 1.0 as all, but the new potential pattern, are presently.
Bill P.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'soft_objectweakstrengthaspigm.jpg' (143 KB)
Preview of image 'soft_objectweakstrengthaspigm.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
William F Pokorny <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
"One of my goals with the hard_object pattern was to get to where we
could pass an object with a defined inside to some macro and have it
create ... ( ... surface-skin) isosurface for that
object without the need for extra outside steps."
Yes, this is something I think would be very useful indeed.
I think a lot of us dabbling with fillets and meshifying primitives and Bezier
patches and isosurfaces have at some point eyed that as a goal - to "somehow"
skin-over an object or union of objects.
It would be especially useful, I think, because I'm guessing that a pattern or
texture might be able to be "wrapped" in x/y/z so as to cover all of the "faces"
of the result.
This can be a real pain with CSG and standard procedural textures.
This is a very interesting project, and I hope you keep at it and make some more
excellent progress! :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>
> While obviously not a complete/correct PP implementation, using a
> superellipsoid - as Thomas did in his original peeling paint texture
> postings - kinda functions. See the attached image.
>
>
All of this is quite fascinating.
I must have missed Thomas's posting. Anyone have a link to it?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I must have missed Thomas's posting. Anyone have a link to it?
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3C537db33d%40news.povray.org%3E/?ttop=414962&toff=450
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Mike Horvath
Subject: Re: hard_object, soft_object pattern 3.7.2 patch branch.
Date: 31 Mar 2017 23:58:47
Message: <58df2577$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/3/2017 5:43 AM, William F Pokorny wrote:
> The three attached images were created using two new patterns called
> hard_object and soft_object. They can be found in the patch branch off
> master (3.7.2) at:
>
How long did those take to render? Isosurfaces are usually very slow.
Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>
> > I must have missed Thomas's posting. Anyone have a link to it?
>
>
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3C537db33d%40news.povray.org%3E/?ttop=414962&toff=450
Cool stuff, missed it before too. Missed a whole lot those few, to many, years
ago.
Thought I replied here earlier, too, these new object patterns are intriguing.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: hard_object, soft_object pattern 3.7.2 patch branch.
Date: 1 Apr 2017 03:08:21
Message: <58df51e5$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1-4-2017 6:26, omniverse wrote:
> "Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>> "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>>
>>> I must have missed Thomas's posting. Anyone have a link to it?
>>
>>
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3C537db33d%40news.povray.org%3E/?ttop=414962&toff=450
>
> Cool stuff, missed it before too. Missed a whole lot those few, to many, years
> ago.
> Thought I replied here earlier, too, these new object patterns are intriguing.
>
> Bob
>
And I forgot about that nice grunge texture by Paolo, at the end of that
same post. ;-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |