 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi!
I do attach a small picture which shows what I mean.
The edges are really bad at the pen's main part. (On the right in the
picture:)
What can I do against this?
Are there some general settings which could prevent this?
If rendered in a smaller form, the edges/texture are even worse.
Greetings
Dieter
#macro pen (pr,pml,peakl,number_of_sides,maintex,peaktex,minetex)
// pr = penradius; pml = pen main part length; peakl = whole peak's length;
// number_of_sides = number_of_sides;
// maintex / peaktex / minetex = texture of main part / peak / mine
#local mineradius = pr/3.8;
#local plane_x = cos( 2*pi/number_of_sides / 2 ) * pr;
#local i=0;
intersection{
union{ cylinder {0 <0,pml,0> pr }
cone{ <0,peakl/10,0> pr*11/10 <0,-peakl,0> 0
texture { gradient y
texture_map {
[ 0.0 minetex ]
[ 0.3 minetex ]
[ 0.35 peaktex scale peakl/2]
[ 1.0 peaktex scale peakl/2]
}
scale peakl
}
}
}
#while (i<number_of_sides)
plane { x, plane_x
rotate y*i*360/number_of_sides
}
#local i=i+1;
#end
texture {
function{sqrt(x*x+z*z)}
texture_map {
[ 0.0 maintex ]
[ 0.94 maintex ]
[ 0.94 minetex ]
[ 1.0 minetex ]
}
scale pr
}
rotate z*-90
}
#end
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'pen.jpg' (5 KB)
Preview of image 'pen.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I do attach a small picture which shows what I mean.
> The edges are really bad at the pen's main part. (On the right in the
> picture:)
It looks about right to me. Because of your texture_map, not all of the side
of the pencil is fully red, but the "corners" of the side *are* fully red
because they're farther out (beyond the 0.94 area). Since the "corners" are
at the top and bottom of the pencil in the image, the bright redness may be
the reason you're not happy with the result.
What quality of AA'ing are you using? (What are your command line settings?)
You could up the sample count of AA'ed pixels with +R4 to see if that helps.
Finally, what's the source code for the plane or background beneath the
objects?
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
D. H. Berlin wrote:
> I do attach a small picture which shows what I mean.
> The edges are really bad at the pen's main part. (On the right in the
> picture:)
>
> What can I do against this?
> Are there some general settings which could prevent this?
Try "+a0.0 +am2 +r4" and see what happens. Usually when a feature is not
giving the results you need you should also post the settings you are
using so others can help more easily...So, what AA settings did you use?
Severi S.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'm using the pregiven resolutions and AA. (0.3)
The background shouldn't be the reason. It's a high contrast, but there are
too much stairs at the _edges_.
The texture itself does what it should (mathematically).
I have added a collection. The edges aren't nice.
Greetings
Dieter
(There is some unimportant reflection at some red pens.)
"Slime" <fak### [at] email address> wrote:
> > I do attach a small picture which shows what I mean.
> > The edges are really bad at the pen's main part. (On the right in the
> > picture:)
>
> It looks about right to me. Because of your texture_map, not all of the side
> of the pencil is fully red, but the "corners" of the side *are* fully red
> because they're farther out (beyond the 0.94 area). Since the "corners" are
> at the top and bottom of the pencil in the image, the bright redness may be
> the reason you're not happy with the result.
>
> What quality of AA'ing are you using? (What are your command line settings?)
> You could up the sample count of AA'ed pixels with +R4 to see if that helps.
>
> Finally, what's the source code for the plane or background beneath the
> objects?
>
> - Slime
> [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'pensc.jpg' (52 KB)
Preview of image 'pensc.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
At@ Severi Salminen <sev### [at] NOT_THISsibafi> wrote:
> Try "+a0.0 +am2 +r4" and see what happens.
It's only _very sligthly_ better. And it slows down rendering more than
factor 100.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Severi Salminen
Subject: Re: no smooth edges even with Antialiasing
Date: 20 Aug 2004 04:40:28
Message: <4125b8fc@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
D. H. Berlin wrote:
> At@ Severi Salminen <sev### [at] NOT_THISsibafi> wrote:
>
>
>>Try "+a0.0 +am2 +r4" and see what happens.
>
>
> It's only _very sligthly_ better. And it slows down rendering more than
> factor 100.
Looking at your second pictures I'd try to make the red strips a bit
wider. Now it seems that because the final resolution is so low the
strips get so small that jagginess cannot be avoided. Do the pens look
ok if you render them 10x as big?
And you can try to find the optimal solution by not using +am2, using
larger +rX and larger +aY than 0.0. I suggested it just to see what is
causing the problem here - +a0.0 sure makes it slooooooooooowwwwww.... ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Making it bigger with scaling the camera-pos with 0.1 still result in
stairs. The stairs have the same size _in pixels_ as before scaling.
I could render my pics 10000x8000 and then resize the image with factor 50
:)
I'n the moment I will not try to change anything any further. It's just a
pencil, and I will find a workaround if necessary.
Thank you all.
@Slime: Nice Homepage! I have always looked for something like the facelets.
And the css-changing is nice too.
Greetings
Dieter
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Maybe you should try focal blur. Nowadays I almost always use focal blur for
antialiasing.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
wee### [at] PoVStefaniede news:web.4125b319444736085f9f41080@news.povray.org
> It's only _very sligthly_ better. And it slows down rendering more than
> factor 100.
>
I suggest a0.05 +am2 +r2 and rendering image with double size, then
reambplig wit a good graphics program.
Or perhaps use focal_blur?
--
http://www.raf256.com/3d/
Rafal Maj 'Raf256', home page - http://www.raf256.com/me/
Computer Graphics
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> The background shouldn't be the reason. It's a high contrast, but there
are
> too much stairs at the _edges_.
I'd still like to see the background code (for the white background) as I
have a suspicion about it that could be causing the problem. It may be fine
but I'd just like to see.
The ones on the brown background look perfectly correct to me, so I'm not
exactly sure what your complaint is on those. You could try turning on
jittering (+J I think) which might help. You could also try AA method 2
(+AM2) or, again, higher sampling count on the AA'ed pixels (+R4 or even
+R5).
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
