 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2024-04-17 08:28 (-4), RATH, CHRISTOPHER A wrote:
>>
> This is a ways from being done, but I wanted to share the updated image
> with the bubbles fixed. The balloon texture is still not quite right,
> even when I render with radiosity (which this version does not).
I doubt radiosity makes any difference here. I would give Alain's
suggestion of blurred reflection a try. If you haven't seen it yet, the
technique is at:
https://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:Language_Questions_and_Tips#Topic_13
To avoid having this technique stall and take forever, use Alain's
modification:
https://news.povray.org/49b9809b%241%40news.povray.org
And I would cut the reflection in half or even lower; and if you're
using finish-level Fresnel, remember to use the reduced reflection as
its argument:
finish
{ fresnel 0.5
reflection { 0.5 fresnel }
conserve_energy
...
}
The reflection of the water highlights on the right edge of the balloon
looks suspiciously metallic. Is this not a rubber balloon?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2024-04-17 à 12:17, Cousin Ricky a écrit :
> On 2024-04-17 08:28 (-4), RATH, CHRISTOPHER A wrote:
>>>
>> This is a ways from being done, but I wanted to share the updated image
>> with the bubbles fixed. The balloon texture is still not quite right,
>> even when I render with radiosity (which this version does not).
>
> I doubt radiosity makes any difference here. I would give Alain's
> suggestion of blurred reflection a try. If you haven't seen it yet, the
> technique is at:
>
> https://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:Language_Questions_and_Tips#Topic_13
>
> To avoid having this technique stall and take forever, use Alain's
> modification:
>
> https://news.povray.org/49b9809b%241%40news.povray.org
>
> And I would cut the reflection in half or even lower; and if you're
> using finish-level Fresnel, remember to use the reduced reflection as
> its argument:
>
> finish
> { fresnel 0.5
> reflection { 0.5 fresnel }
> conserve_energy
> ...
> }
>
> The reflection of the water highlights on the right edge of the balloon
> looks suspiciously metallic. Is this not a rubber balloon?
>
I agree about toning the transparency down. I'd go as far as dividing it
by 3 to 4.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I really like the trees.
Wondering if you can divvy them up by progressively subtracting inverted cones
from them and recombining the sections with some randomness to make them a
little less perfectly conical.
The planks on the bench need to be far thicker.
I have no doubt that you can figure out what to do with the granite blocks.
I'd experiment with jiggling and bending the water spouts, and adding in a
verdigris patina to the texture.
The grass and paths are looking good.
For the paths, consider that grass usually grows inward from the edges, you may
have rogue tufts in the middle of the path, and perhaps ruts with water /
different texture or color - maybe cracked mud.
Wildflowers, dandelions, bees, butterflies...
Would be great if you could throw a few birds into the scene.
Maybe a squirrel.
The field looks rather - empty. Not saying dump some trash onto it, but maybe a
bike, a sunbathing towel, ... just some more indicators that it's been recently
visited and used. A trash can and or a drinking fountain would be cool too.
- BE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/17/2024 5:32 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
> I really like the trees.
> Wondering if you can divvy them up by progressively subtracting inverted cones
> from them and recombining the sections with some randomness to make them a
> little less perfectly conical.
>
> The planks on the bench need to be far thicker.
>
> I have no doubt that you can figure out what to do with the granite blocks.
>
> I'd experiment with jiggling and bending the water spouts, and adding in a
> verdigris patina to the texture.
>
> The grass and paths are looking good.
> For the paths, consider that grass usually grows inward from the edges, you may
> have rogue tufts in the middle of the path, and perhaps ruts with water /
> different texture or color - maybe cracked mud.
> Wildflowers, dandelions, bees, butterflies...
>
> Would be great if you could throw a few birds into the scene.
> Maybe a squirrel.
>
> The field looks rather - empty. Not saying dump some trash onto it, but maybe a
> bike, a sunbathing towel, ... just some more indicators that it's been recently
> visited and used. A trash can and or a drinking fountain would be cool too.
>
> - BE
>
>
The trees are isosurfaces using a cone function with noise added in to
get the layers of branches. I can add some noise to the slope function
that drives the main shape and perturb the central access as well. I
was surprised, though, by how nice they look with so little effort.
The spouts actually shoot bubbles, but you are right, the texture is
just a pure RC3Metal. They need a little texture as well as some
corrosion, and the directions they are pointing don't have any noise in
them either.
I started working on better grass for the foreground, but then got
distracted by the balloon. I'll have to work out some ways to get the
grass to grow more realistically into the sides of the path. I'll
probably use whatever near-view grass shapes to create tufts in the path
as well.
The current working version has a cluster of balloons floating over the
field. I'll be adding more elements as I get the existing ones cleaned up.
-- Chris R
--
-- Chris R
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/17/2024 12:17 PM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> On 2024-04-17 08:28 (-4), RATH, CHRISTOPHER A wrote:
>>>
>> This is a ways from being done, but I wanted to share the updated image
>> with the bubbles fixed. The balloon texture is still not quite right,
>> even when I render with radiosity (which this version does not).
>
> I doubt radiosity makes any difference here. I would give Alain's
> suggestion of blurred reflection a try. If you haven't seen it yet, the
> technique is at:
>
> https://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:Language_Questions_and_Tips#Topic_13
>
> To avoid having this technique stall and take forever, use Alain's
> modification:
>
> https://news.povray.org/49b9809b%241%40news.povray.org
>
> And I would cut the reflection in half or even lower; and if you're
> using finish-level Fresnel, remember to use the reduced reflection as
> its argument:
>
> finish
> { fresnel 0.5
> reflection { 0.5 fresnel }
> conserve_energy
> ...
> }
>
> The reflection of the water highlights on the right edge of the balloon
> looks suspiciously metallic. Is this not a rubber balloon?
>
I looked at the code for doing the blurred reflections and started
experimenting with it. I was able to get a nice blurring mirror using
CSG objects and this technique where I can play with the variables.
However, the balloon is an isosurface with a pretty small accuracy value
to remove artifacts, so hitting it with 40X more rays drops the
rendering to a halt. I can get it to go with a small blur count, but I
don't think that will give me the blur effect.
I'm still playing with it. If I can find a good way to create the
balloon using CSG instead of isosurfaces that may be the better
solution, since I don't need a bumpy surface.
-- Chris R
--
-- Chris R
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2024-04-18 à 08:56, RATH, CHRISTOPHER A a écrit :
> On 4/17/2024 12:17 PM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
>> On 2024-04-17 08:28 (-4), RATH, CHRISTOPHER A wrote:
>>>>
>>> This is a ways from being done, but I wanted to share the updated image
>>> with the bubbles fixed. The balloon texture is still not quite right,
>>> even when I render with radiosity (which this version does not).
>>
>> I doubt radiosity makes any difference here. I would give Alain's
>> suggestion of blurred reflection a try. If you haven't seen it yet, the
>> technique is at:
>>
>> https://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:Language_Questions_and_Tips#Topic_13
>>
>> To avoid having this technique stall and take forever, use Alain's
>> modification:
>>
>> https://news.povray.org/49b9809b%241%40news.povray.org
>>
>> And I would cut the reflection in half or even lower; and if you're
>> using finish-level Fresnel, remember to use the reduced reflection as
>> its argument:
>>
>> finish
>> { fresnel 0.5
>> reflection { 0.5 fresnel }
>> conserve_energy
>> ...
>> }
>>
>> The reflection of the water highlights on the right edge of the balloon
>> looks suspiciously metallic. Is this not a rubber balloon?
>>
> I looked at the code for doing the blurred reflections and started
> experimenting with it. I was able to get a nice blurring mirror using
> CSG objects and this technique where I can play with the variables.
>
> However, the balloon is an isosurface with a pretty small accuracy value
> to remove artifacts, so hitting it with 40X more rays drops the
> rendering to a halt. I can get it to go with a small blur count, but I
> don't think that will give me the blur effect.
>
> I'm still playing with it. If I can find a good way to create the
> balloon using CSG instead of isosurfaces that may be the better
> solution, since I don't need a bumpy surface.
>
> -- Chris R
Then, you need to use the micro-normal technique. Add a normal statement
scaled very small.
normal{granite scale 0.01}
Then use a reasonable amount of antialiasing. Without antialiasing, the
micro-normal will result in a grainy image.
Optionally : You may add some averaged blurring using a small number of
textures. Using averaged textures and micro-normals, you can use about 4
to 6 averaged textures and get very good results.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"RATH, CHRISTOPHER A" <car### [at] comcast net> wrote:
> The trees are isosurfaces using a cone function with noise added in to
> get the layers of branches. I can add some noise to the slope function
> that drives the main shape and perturb the central access as well. I
> was surprised, though, by how nice they look with so little effort.
Those are _isosurfaces_??!
That's amazing.
I'm glad you share your WIPs as things develop.
You have a lot of interesting approaches, and your scene turn out really well!
- BE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/18/2024 1:35 PM, Alain Martel wrote:
> Le 2024-04-18 à 08:56, RATH, CHRISTOPHER A a écrit :
>> On 4/17/2024 12:17 PM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
>>> On 2024-04-17 08:28 (-4), RATH, CHRISTOPHER A wrote:
>>>>>
>>>> This is a ways from being done, but I wanted to share the updated image
>>>> with the bubbles fixed. The balloon texture is still not quite right,
>>>> even when I render with radiosity (which this version does not).
>>>
>>> I doubt radiosity makes any difference here. I would give Alain's
>>> suggestion of blurred reflection a try. If you haven't seen it yet, the
>>> technique is at:
>>>
>>> https://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:Language_Questions_and_Tips#Topic_13
>>>
>>> To avoid having this technique stall and take forever, use Alain's
>>> modification:
>>>
>>> https://news.povray.org/49b9809b%241%40news.povray.org
>>>
>>> And I would cut the reflection in half or even lower; and if you're
>>> using finish-level Fresnel, remember to use the reduced reflection as
>>> its argument:
>>>
>>> finish
>>> { fresnel 0.5
>>> reflection { 0.5 fresnel }
>>> conserve_energy
>>> ...
>>> }
>>>
>>> The reflection of the water highlights on the right edge of the balloon
>>> looks suspiciously metallic. Is this not a rubber balloon?
>>>
>> I looked at the code for doing the blurred reflections and started
>> experimenting with it. I was able to get a nice blurring mirror using
>> CSG objects and this technique where I can play with the variables.
>>
>> However, the balloon is an isosurface with a pretty small accuracy
>> value to remove artifacts, so hitting it with 40X more rays drops the
>> rendering to a halt. I can get it to go with a small blur count, but
>> I don't think that will give me the blur effect.
>>
>> I'm still playing with it. If I can find a good way to create the
>> balloon using CSG instead of isosurfaces that may be the better
>> solution, since I don't need a bumpy surface.
>>
>> -- Chris R
> Then, you need to use the micro-normal technique. Add a normal statement
> scaled very small.
>
> normal{granite scale 0.01}
>
> Then use a reasonable amount of antialiasing. Without antialiasing, the
> micro-normal will result in a grainy image.
>
> Optionally : You may add some averaged blurring using a small number of
> textures. Using averaged textures and micro-normals, you can use about 4
> to 6 averaged textures and get very good results.
I noticed, (duh), that my complex shape function for the balloons, (A 2D
polar function I found that I then turn into an SOR in the isosurface),
looks remarkably like the built-in ovus shape with a slightly stretched
distance value. So, I recreated the balloons using that and was able to
get a reasonable rendering time with a small scale blur and 10 blur
samples that looks pretty good "in the lab", which included a wavy
reflective pool to mimic the reflections in the fountain. It isn't as
fast as a simple box or sphere, but better than the isosurface.
However, now that I've inserted it into the scene my rendering is
getting stuck on the balloon again, even with pretty bad anti-aliasing,
so I will go back to the drawing board with your suggestion above using
the micro-normals. I think dropping the fresnel and reflection values
to 0.3 or lower is at least removing the unexpected shininess, but maybe
the micro-normals will give enough of the blurring to make it realistic
enough.
--
-- Chris R
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/18/2024 8:08 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
> "RATH, CHRISTOPHER A" <car### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
>
>> The trees are isosurfaces using a cone function with noise added in to
>> get the layers of branches. I can add some noise to the slope function
>> that drives the main shape and perturb the central access as well. I
>> was surprised, though, by how nice they look with so little effort.
>
> Those are _isosurfaces_??!
> That's amazing.
>
> I'm glad you share your WIPs as things develop.
> You have a lot of interesting approaches, and your scene turn out really well!
>
> - BE
>
>
>
Isosurfaces are my go-to for most of the elements in my scenes, unless
they are too far away for surface texture to be noticeable. In close-up
views, I never find that just using normals gives me the look that I
want, whereas I have complete control with an isosurface.
I pay for this, though, as my scenes tend to render pretty slowly...
--
-- Chris R
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/18/2024 1:35 PM, Alain Martel wrote:
> Le 2024-04-18 à 08:56, RATH, CHRISTOPHER A a écrit :
>> On 4/17/2024 12:17 PM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
>>> On 2024-04-17 08:28 (-4), RATH, CHRISTOPHER A wrote:
>>>>>
>>>> This is a ways from being done, but I wanted to share the updated image
>>>> with the bubbles fixed. The balloon texture is still not quite right,
>>>> even when I render with radiosity (which this version does not).
>>>
>>> I doubt radiosity makes any difference here. I would give Alain's
>>> suggestion of blurred reflection a try. If you haven't seen it yet, the
>>> technique is at:
>>>
>>> https://wiki.povray.org/content/Knowledgebase:Language_Questions_and_Tips#Topic_13
>>>
>>> To avoid having this technique stall and take forever, use Alain's
>>> modification:
>>>
>>> https://news.povray.org/49b9809b%241%40news.povray.org
>>>
>>> And I would cut the reflection in half or even lower; and if you're
>>> using finish-level Fresnel, remember to use the reduced reflection as
>>> its argument:
>>>
>>> finish
>>> { fresnel 0.5
>>> reflection { 0.5 fresnel }
>>> conserve_energy
>>> ...
>>> }
>>>
>>> The reflection of the water highlights on the right edge of the balloon
>>> looks suspiciously metallic. Is this not a rubber balloon?
>>>
>> I looked at the code for doing the blurred reflections and started
>> experimenting with it. I was able to get a nice blurring mirror using
>> CSG objects and this technique where I can play with the variables.
>>
>> However, the balloon is an isosurface with a pretty small accuracy
>> value to remove artifacts, so hitting it with 40X more rays drops the
>> rendering to a halt. I can get it to go with a small blur count, but
>> I don't think that will give me the blur effect.
>>
>> I'm still playing with it. If I can find a good way to create the
>> balloon using CSG instead of isosurfaces that may be the better
>> solution, since I don't need a bumpy surface.
>>
>> -- Chris R
> Then, you need to use the micro-normal technique. Add a normal statement
> scaled very small.
>
> normal{granite scale 0.01}
>
> Then use a reasonable amount of antialiasing. Without antialiasing, the
> micro-normal will result in a grainy image.
>
> Optionally : You may add some averaged blurring using a small number of
> textures. Using averaged textures and micro-normals, you can use about 4
> to 6 averaged textures and get very good results.
Here's what I've come up with so far. I abandoned the texture-averaging
blurring technique because it's just too slow, even using the ovus. I'm
using a micro-normal instead. I also added a small transmit value along
with the filter to the pigments. The colors have also been muted to
better reflect what happens when you inflate a balloon. The reflection
has been toned down quite a bit.
These are test renderings of the distant balloon cluster and the nearby
balloon. Getting them to look like this in the full scene is still a
bit of a challenge.
--
-- Chris R
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'balloon-bench.png' (613 KB)
Download 'balloon-cluster.png' (305 KB)
Preview of image 'balloon-bench.png'
Preview of image 'balloon-cluster.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
