On 08/09/2018 08:38, BGimeno wrote:

>> On 08/09/2018 01:18, Bald Eagle wrote:
>>> And second of all, these damned dried frog pills that I imported from 
>>> Scotland
>>> send up a cloud of dust every time I bite into them, so I missed that 
>>> sections
>>> when I was scrolling down...
>>
>> A cloud, you say. That sounds like dried midgie pills. (Highland 
>> midge: Culicoides impunctatus) Generally used as groundbait or to keep 
>> horses docile. ;)
>>
> If this is true, it seems that the time is coming to compile my own 
> version in Ubuntu.
> 

Of course it's true.
Trust me I am a Pover. ;)


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

hi,

"jr" <cre### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> will follow this up tomorrow, I've been playing with the colour and the latest
> run was two minutes faster (!!) than the previous.  need to chck this further.

I changed the colour of the filigree to 'BrightGold', and the return value of
the CW_angle macro (ie use the other colour).

that more than doubled the radiosity time, from ~130s to ~348s, and the render
went up from about 20 minutes to:

Render Time:
  Photon Time:      No photons
  Radiosity Time:   0 hours  5 minutes 48 seconds (348.012 seconds)
              using 4 thread(s) with 1384.908 CPU-seconds total
  Trace Time:       0 hours 31 minutes 50 seconds (1910.868 seconds)
              using 4 thread(s) with 7562.702 CPU-seconds total

the difference between white + gold filigree is around 3.5 minutes for the
original Cw_angle, and 4.5 minutes for the 5-colour version, white being slower.

now I would like to find out how to increase the translucence of the rhomboids.

regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'snip.png' (309 KB)

Preview of image 'snip.png'

Am 08.09.2018 um 13:45 schrieb jr:
> now I would like to find out how to increase the translucence of the rhomboids.

Are you aiming for semi-transparency or diffuse translucency?

Post a reply to this message

Le 18-09-07 à 18:24, Bald Eagle a écrit :
> "jr" <cre### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> 
>>> parsing is well under a minute, and (4 threads) radiosity ....
> 
> So, I'm triply confused.
> a)  There's a quality 11?    (Throws horns, bangs head)
> 

Yes, but quality 10 and 11 are functionally the same as 9.

Post a reply to this message

> now I would like to find out how to increase the translucence of the rhomboids.
>
> regards, jr.

Look in the last line of the CW_angle macro, I deactivated the values
​​of transparency and filters to avoid warning messages.
The code is a little clumsy and needs many fixes to avoid duplicate code here
and there. Patience.

BGimeno

Pd. Don't call them rhomboids, they are squares subjected to great tension. Very
sensitive polygons.

Post a reply to this message

hi,

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 08.09.2018 um 13:45 schrieb jr:
> > now I would like to find out how to increase the translucence of the rhomboids.
>
> Are you aiming for semi-transparency or diffuse translucency?

translucent I guess.  I replaced (in BGimeno's code) the rgb colour returned
from  the CW_angle macro with a rgbt (with fixed .45 transmit, see image) but
that results in increased transparency.  the effect I'd like to achieve is more
like very, very thin mother-of-pearl.


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'snip.png' (349 KB)

Preview of image 'snip.png'

hi,

"B. Gimeno" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> > now I would like to find out how to increase the translucence of the rhomboids.
> >
> > regards, jr.
>
> Look in the last line of the CW_angle macro, I deactivated the values
> ​​of transparency and filters to avoid warning messages.
> The code is a little clumsy and needs many fixes to avoid duplicate code here
> and there. Patience.

thanks.  I put a '#debug concat' inside the macro and found that both filter +
transmit stayed at 0.0 throughout.  that led me to use a (fixed) transmit value
as part of a 'rgbt' colour.  see reply to clipka for image.

> BGimeno
>
> Pd. Don't call them rhomboids, they are squares subjected to great tension. Very
> sensitive polygons.

:-)  "square" too is full of connotations, how about "retro oblong"?  ;-)


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message

Am 09.09.2018 um 18:50 schrieb jr:
> hi,
> 
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>> Am 08.09.2018 um 13:45 schrieb jr:
>>> now I would like to find out how to increase the translucence of the rhomboids.
>>
>> Are you aiming for semi-transparency or diffuse translucency?
> 
> translucent I guess.  I replaced (in BGimeno's code) the rgb colour returned
> from  the CW_angle macro with a rgbt (with fixed .45 transmit, see image) but
> that results in increased transparency.  the effect I'd like to achieve is more
> like very, very thin mother-of-pearl.

Then - presuming your torus thingumajig is using non-solid geometry -
you want backside diffuse illumination, and maybe one or two more levels
of radiosity recursion.

To enable backside diffuse illumination, use the two-parameter version
of `diffuse`:

    finish { diffuse FRONT,BACK }

where FRONT is how much light is reflected to the illuminated side, and
BACK is how much light is transmittend to the other side. The sum should
be smaller than than 1.0 for realistic materials.

Post a reply to this message

Le 18-09-09 à 13:08, clipka a écrit :
> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:50 schrieb jr:
>> hi,
>>
>> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>>> Am 08.09.2018 um 13:45 schrieb jr:
>>>> now I would like to find out how to increase the translucence of the rhomboids.
>>>
>>> Are you aiming for semi-transparency or diffuse translucency?
>>
>> translucent I guess.  I replaced (in BGimeno's code) the rgb colour returned
>> from  the CW_angle macro with a rgbt (with fixed .45 transmit, see image) but
>> that results in increased transparency.  the effect I'd like to achieve is more
>> like very, very thin mother-of-pearl.
> 
> Then - presuming your torus thingumajig is using non-solid geometry -
> you want backside diffuse illumination, and maybe one or two more levels
> of radiosity recursion.
> 
> To enable backside diffuse illumination, use the two-parameter version
> of `diffuse`:
> 
>      finish { diffuse FRONT,BACK }
> 
> where FRONT is how much light is reflected to the illuminated side, and
> BACK is how much light is transmittend to the other side. The sum should
> be smaller than than 1.0 for realistic materials.
> 

For mother-of-pearl, you also need a fair amount of iridescence. Maybe 
something in the 0.4 .. 0.6 range.

Post a reply to this message

hi,

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 09.09.2018 um 18:50 schrieb jr:
> > ... like very, very thin mother-of-pearl.
>
> Then - presuming your torus thingumajig is using non-solid geometry -

"my" torus.  lol.  I would not be able to create anything like it -- if my life
depended on it.

> you want backside diffuse illumination, and maybe one or two more levels
> of radiosity recursion.
> To enable backside diffuse illumination, use the two-parameter version
> of `diffuse`:
>     finish { diffuse FRONT,BACK }
> where FRONT is how much light is reflected to the illuminated side, and
> BACK is how much light is transmittend to the other side. The sum should
> be smaller than than 1.0 for realistic materials.

only had one quick try so far (got a bit paranoid last night when the CPU temp



Alain <kua### [at] videotronca> wrote:
> For mother-of-pearl, you also need a fair amount of iridescence. Maybe
> something in the 0.4 .. 0.6 range.

thanks.  I'll add this "into the mix" next run.


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message