 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
> I give you some value:
>
>
> for cloud with droplet size 3000nm, rgb<1.000, 0.928, 0.812>
> for cloud with droplet size 4000nm, rgb<1.000, 0.837, 0.780>
> for cloud with droplet size 5000nm, rgb<1.000, 0.793, 0.753>
> for cloud with droplet size 6000nm, rgb<1.000, 0.780, 0.738>
> for cloud with droplet size 7000nm, rgb<1.000, 0.784, 0.746>
> for cloud with droplet size 8000nm, rgb<1.000, 0.782, 0.743>
> for cloud with droplet size 9000nm, rgb<1.000, 0.781, 0.747>
>
> for cloud with droplet size 10000nm, rgb<1.000, 0.779, 0.745>
> for cloud with droplet size 12000nm, rgb<1.000, 0.784, 0.750>
> for cloud with droplet size 14000nm, rgb<1.000, 0.784, 0.749>
> for cloud with droplet size 16000nm, rgb<1.000, 0.788, 0.747>
> for cloud with droplet size 18000nm, rgb<1.000, 0.783, 0.749>
>
>
The size is radius, I post a picture, can find some value on it.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'cloud radius reference.png' (264 KB)
Preview of image 'cloud radius reference.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 01.12.2017 01:32, And wrote:
> I give you some value:
> The size is radius, I post a picture, can find some value on it.
Hi, big thanks.
As I understand it, I need to add this media into the declaration of
each sun, is that correct? And if so, would the sun sphere need to be
hollow?
---
http://www.avg.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmail com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for posting your code. I've been playing around with it, and made an
> area_light to replace your point light... which makes the scene even SLOWER to
> render, of course, but I noticed that your test-building on the left
> was casting too 'sharp' of a shadow through the foggy atmosphere, compared
> to the size of the large Sun. (I only noticed the sharpness re: that
> one building, so *maybe* the area light could be assigned to *just* that
> building, in a light_group, to save rendering time. I haven't tried that
> yet, though.) Anyway, here's the light...
>
No, don't waste your time with that single building/light_group idea, sorry. I
tried it and the results are not what I had imagined. I don't know how to
describe the resulting effect, but it definitely looks 'wrong' with the clouds
and atmospheric medias.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sven Littkowski <I### [at] SvenLittkowskiname> wrote:
> On 01.12.2017 01:32, And wrote:
> > I give you some value:
> > The size is radius, I post a picture, can find some value on it.
>
> Hi, big thanks.
>
> As I understand it, I need to add this media into the declaration of
> each sun, is that correct? And if so, would the sun sphere need to be
> hollow?
>
>
> ---
> http://www.avg.com
Sun...no, this is for cloud.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
test my cloud with a sculpted mountain
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'mountain scene1 4.png' (99 KB)
Preview of image 'mountain scene1 4.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
> test my cloud with a sculpted mountain
rendered from high altitude
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'mountain scene2 1.png' (262 KB)
Preview of image 'mountain scene2 1.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 01.12.2017 02:48, And wrote:
> Sven Littkowski <I### [at] SvenLittkowskiname> wrote:
>> On 01.12.2017 01:32, And wrote:
>>> I give you some value:
>>> The size is radius, I post a picture, can find some value on it.
>>
>> Hi, big thanks.
>>
>> As I understand it, I need to add this media into the declaration of
>> each sun, is that correct? And if so, would the sun sphere need to be
>> hollow?
>>
>>
>> ---
>> http://www.avg.com
>
> Sun...no, this is for cloud.
>
Olala! Thanks for telling me. Will try it out. :-) :-D
But we need to find a way, to get a glow around the two suns, too.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Is there any location, where "this" and "dens_cloud" are defined? I
feel, I am missing some previous code here. :-)
---
http://www.avg.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On your last (high-attitude) cloud image, i would apply a tiny scale
attribute to your clouds. make them just a little bit flatter, maybe 10
to 20% only.
Your low-attitude cloudy-mountains image shows clouds that are not dense
enough in their center, not hiding the mountains well enough yet. I
believe, if you increase the density inside the centers, you should be
finished with the cloud coding. :-)
---
http://www.avg.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sven Littkowski <I### [at] SvenLittkowskiname> wrote:
> On your last (high-attitude) cloud image, i would apply a tiny scale
> attribute to your clouds. make them just a little bit flatter, maybe 10
> to 20% only.
>
Hmm really?
> Your low-attitude cloudy-mountains image shows clouds that are not dense
> enough in their center, not hiding the mountains well enough yet. I
> believe, if you increase the density inside the centers, you should be
> finished with the cloud coding. :-)
>
My approach will not allow me to rise the density much more, or it shows more
artifact. That's one of what I said the limit of the media previous. It can
simulate not so dense cloud, but more density it can't.
The two pictures that I last post is in the same cloud setting. Just change the
camera position. I want to express that my approach can simulate cloud nearing
the physical reality, not just an inconstant result.
> ---
> http://www.avg.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
