 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nothing revolutionary, just slow old media clouds. The large image took
about 1 hour 50 minutes to render. The scenes are based on a heavily
updated mediasky.pov, and the scene dimensions are based on the real
world. The ground is a sphere 6378 km in radius, there is an atmosphere
shell that extends to an altitude of about 100 km, and the clouds are up
around 2 km. There is another shell near the ground simulating
low-altitude haze. The clouds and ground haze are type 2, Mie haze, and
the sky is type 4, Rayleigh scattering.
--
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] gmail com>
POV-Ray TAG: <chr### [at] tagpovrayorg>
http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'fluffyclouds1.png' (62 KB)
Download 'fluffyclouds2.png' (61 KB)
Download 'mediasky2.jpg' (63 KB)
Preview of image 'fluffyclouds1.png'
Preview of image 'fluffyclouds2.png'
Preview of image 'mediasky2.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christopher James Huff wrote:
> Nothing revolutionary, just slow old media clouds.
Might be slow, but still looks good.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Nothing revolutionary, just slow old media clouds. The large image took
> about 1 hour 50 minutes to render. The scenes are based on a heavily
> updated mediasky.pov, and the scene dimensions are based on the real
> world. The ground is a sphere 6378 km in radius, there is an atmosphere
> shell that extends to an altitude of about 100 km, and the clouds are up
> around 2 km. There is another shell near the ground simulating
> low-altitude haze. The clouds and ground haze are type 2, Mie haze, and
> the sky is type 4, Rayleigh scattering.
>
> --
> Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] gmailcom>
> POV-Ray TAG: <chr### [at] tagpovrayorg>
> http://tag.povray.org/
Wow. Looks like another faux(pho)-POV ;-) (when someone tries to pass off
actual photography as a POVRay render)
If I recall correctly, you also live in the midwestern US, perhaps that's
why the clouds look so exactly like what I'm used to seeing.
How did you do the rain(?) in the 3rd one?
On another topic, how much difference does Rayleigh scattering make? In the
scenes I've tried, I can't tell much difference between scattering methods,
but I'm probably using poor examples.
Dave Matthews
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <4225efa8@news.povray.org>, Art Flint <pfl### [at] stxrrcom>
wrote:
> Christopher James Huff wrote:
> > Nothing revolutionary, just slow old media clouds.
>
> Might be slow, but still looks good.
Here's some new ones, trying for something more like light rainclouds.
rainyskylate.jpg was an attempt at a late afternoon sky, not quite what
I intended but pretty nice looking. I'm starting to get better structure
on the large clouds, which were pretty featureless in the earlier
renders.
I'm still not quite satisfied with the horizon, it shouldn't be glowing
so brightly, but I think some work on the atmosphere density falloff
will fix that. In any case, the combination of haze and curvature do a
pretty good job of fixing the "infinite horizon" problem. At least it
should be useful for most scenes, where the horizon isn't visible. And
since clouds are too distant to interact directly with most scenes, you
could just use a background sky_sphere from a pre-rendered sky. (HDRI
would be very useful here.)
--
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] gmailcom>
POV-Ray TAG: <chr### [at] tagpovrayorg>
http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'rainysky2.jpg' (40 KB)
Download 'rainyskylate.jpg' (45 KB)
Preview of image 'rainysky2.jpg'
Preview of image 'rainyskylate.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> The clouds and ground haze are type 2, Mie haze,
> and the sky is type 4, Rayleigh scattering.
Very nice! I would love to see the source for this. I have tried before to
model the atmosphere using scattering media, but I never could properly
balance the molecular and particulate contributions.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
