On 4/27/2017 12:12 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 27-4-2017 10:07, Stephen wrote:
>> On 4/27/2017 7:59 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> On 27-4-2017 0:29, Stephen wrote:

>>
>> But I did a couple of runs with +am3 as it was the first time I had used
>> UberPov.
>
> I am a fan. :-)
>

I had noticed. :)

I appreciate the speed up more than the other features. I have an 800 
frame animation that I am working on. I'll certainly use it for that.

>>
>>>>
>>>> I am an egg. :-)
>>>> Albeit a thousand-year-old egg. Yum yum.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Hum... I am a bit reluctant to have a bite :-)
>>>
>>
>> They are really nice. They are a bit like haggis, in the way the taste
>> is linked to the way you catch them. ;-)
>>
>
> Really? Well, I shall have to taste haggis too then. ;-)
>


If you don't try it before Brexit you will have to catch your own or 
import it. ;)
Tatties and neeps are available everywhere. Although not always called 
the same thing.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 4/27/2017 12:29 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 27-4-2017 13:12, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>
>> Indeed. I am running a render now with slightly increased quality
>> (+ac0.95 +r4) which is already more satisfactory. 80% done after 3h23'.
>>
>
> ....which completed looks like this.
>

That does make a positive difference. It is more the dragon that shows 
it up. To my eyes it looks as if it hasn't been polished to a high degree.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 27-4-2017 13:12, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>
> > Indeed. I am running a render now with slightly increased quality
> > (+ac0.95 +r4) which is already more satisfactory. 80% done after 3h23'.
> >
>
> ...which completed looks like this.
>
> --
> Thomas

The subsurface scattering in the dragon must add to the render time.
http://www.3d-imaging.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

On 27-4-2017 17:24, j3dj3d wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> On 27-4-2017 13:12, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>
>>> Indeed. I am running a render now with slightly increased quality
>>> (+ac0.95 +r4) which is already more satisfactory. 80% done after 3h23'.
>>>
>>
>> ...which completed looks like this.
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
> The subsurface scattering in the dragon must add to the render time.
> http://www.3d-imaging.co.uk
>
>

Yes indeed, and like Stephen said, it mostly shows up on the dragon too. 
To answers here stephen's other comment: the reflections have been kept 
rather low so the polish is almost absent.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

As a comparison, a render without any subsurface scattering.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'sslt_test_uber_noss.png' (682 KB)

Preview of image 'sslt_test_uber_noss.png'

On 2017-04-28 06:59 AM (-4), Thomas de Groot wrote:
> As a comparison, a render without any subsurface scattering.

That definitely makes a huge difference with the dragon.  It looks like 
modeling clay, not jade.  But there seems only a slight difference with 
the floor, and the egg and cube look the same.

Post a reply to this message

On 29-4-2017 17:05, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> On 2017-04-28 06:59 AM (-4), Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> As a comparison, a render without any subsurface scattering.
>
> That definitely makes a huge difference with the dragon.  It looks like
> modeling clay, not jade.  But there seems only a slight difference with
> the floor, and the egg and cube look the same.
>

I think I need to explore more the translucency strength for each 
object, increasing or decreasing the value. I am not yet done ;-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 30-4-2017 8:43, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 29-4-2017 17:05, Cousin Ricky wrote:
>> On 2017-04-28 06:59 AM (-4), Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> As a comparison, a render without any subsurface scattering.
>>
>> That definitely makes a huge difference with the dragon.  It looks like
>> modeling clay, not jade.  But there seems only a slight difference with
>> the floor, and the egg and cube look the same.
>>
>
> I think I need to explore more the translucency strength for each
> object, increasing or decreasing the value. I am not yet done ;-)
>


In fact, the differences are more subtle. For the cube, compare the 
shadows of dragon and egg: their edges show the stone's translucency. In 
my next render I hope to show this better.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 30-4-2017 9:48, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> In fact, the differences are more subtle. For the cube, compare the
> shadows of dragon and egg: their edges show the stone's translucency. In
> my next render I hope to show this better.
>

In this render:

- Dragon: no SSLT
- Floor: no SSLT
- Cube: SSLT with 5*translucency vector (was 2* in earlier example)
- Egg: SSLT with 3*translucency vector (was 2* in earlier example)

The cube is showing markedly more translucency in the shadows cast on 
it. I see not much difference in the egg, although if I increase the 
translucency exaggeratedly (*100 for instance) the effect becomes distorted.

Question: In the wiki about SSLT it is said: "The effect doesn't scale 
with the object". Does this mean that SSLT works in the same way as a 
scattering media where the amount of scattering has to be compensated 
for the amount of media object's scale? It appears so to me at least 
although this is not mentioned in the wiki.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'sslt_test_uber.png' (679 KB)

Preview of image 'sslt_test_uber.png'

Le 17-04-30 à 07:05, Thomas de Groot a écrit :
> On 30-4-2017 9:48, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> In fact, the differences are more subtle. For the cube, compare the
>> shadows of dragon and egg: their edges show the stone's translucency. In
>> my next render I hope to show this better.
>>
> 
> In this render:
> 
> - Dragon: no SSLT
> - Floor: no SSLT
> - Cube: SSLT with 5*translucency vector (was 2* in earlier example)
> - Egg: SSLT with 3*translucency vector (was 2* in earlier example)
> 
> The cube is showing markedly more translucency in the shadows cast on 
> it. I see not much difference in the egg, although if I increase the 
> translucency exaggeratedly (*100 for instance) the effect becomes 
> distorted.
> 
> Question: In the wiki about SSLT it is said: "The effect doesn't scale 
> with the object". Does this mean that SSLT works in the same way as a 
> scattering media where the amount of scattering has to be compensated 
> for the amount of media object's scale? It appears so to me at least 
> although this is not mentioned in the wiki.
> 

It does work similarly to medias, both emissive, absorbing and scattering.

So, if you scale your scene by 10 and want SSLT to look the same, then 
you need to multiply your SSLT vector by 10. Alternately, you can 
increase mm_per_unit by the same amount in the global_settings block.

Post a reply to this message