Hi everybody,

Since my last post I made some trials to select better camera settings and
add some artifacts.

In version 4, I suppress the column in foreground,
In version 5 I follow one advice to render in vertical direction

These 2 versions are using 75 lights with fade power an no interaction with
media, plus an external parallel light (without fade power) interacting
with media. No media yet, except the 150 glowing candles that are made with
emitting media.

Version 6 is my favourite version for camera setting

And finally, version 7 is an attempt I made with scatteing media and an
older version of the building. I used the same lights as I used for 4 and
5, but it is definitively too slow (rougthly 2,5 days to render) and the
sample value should be increased. I think also that there are too many
visible beams, Do you have any idea to have better image and faster
rendering?

Thanks for comments,

Pascal.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'mosquee.zip' (617 KB)

Pascal,
The fisheye lens leaves me all at sea ;)
It'd be great if you could persuade your camera to give non-curved 
verticals. Even parallel verticals.
I'll leave the horizontals to your sensibilities.
DLM

"chaps" <cha### [at] yahoocom> wrote in message 
news:web.4289a43ae0926a1b624d32510@news.povray.org...
> Hi everybody,
>
> Since my last post I made some trials to select better camera settings and
> add some artifacts.
>
> In version 4, I suppress the column in foreground,
> In version 5 I follow one advice to render in vertical direction
>
> These 2 versions are using 75 lights with fade power an no interaction 
> with
> media, plus an external parallel light (without fade power) interacting
> with media. No media yet, except the 150 glowing candles that are made 
> with
> emitting media.
>
> Version 6 is my favourite version for camera setting
>
> And finally, version 7 is an attempt I made with scatteing media and an
> older version of the building. I used the same lights as I used for 4 and
> 5, but it is definitively too slow (rougthly 2,5 days to render) and the
> sample value should be increased. I think also that there are too many
> visible beams, Do you have any idea to have better image and faster
> rendering?
>
> Thanks for comments,
>
> Pascal.
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

> Pascal,
> The fisheye lens leaves me all at sea ;)
> It'd be great if you could persuade your camera to give non-curved
> verticals. Even parallel verticals.
> I'll leave the horizontals to your sensibilities.
> DLM

OK, that's how it look like without fish eye. Verticals are not parallel. I
gess I should use hortographic camera to get this result, but I'm not sure
I'll like it.

If you could see my home, you 'd know that I like curvy walls :o)

Pascal.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'mosquee8.jpg' (126 KB)

Preview of image 'mosquee8.jpg'

"chaps" <cha### [at] yahoocom> wrote in message 
news:web.428a2b39afaae255624d32510@news.povray.org...
>> Pascal,
>> The fisheye lens leaves me all at sea ;)
>> It'd be great if you could persuade your camera to give non-curved
>> verticals. Even parallel verticals.
>> I'll leave the horizontals to your sensibilities.
>> DLM
>
> OK, that's how it look like without fish eye. Verticals are not parallel. 
> I
> gess I should use hortographic camera to get this result, but I'm not sure
> I'll like it.
>
> If you could see my home, you 'd know that I like curvy walls :o)
>
> Pascal.
>
Pascal
That seems better to me! And in defense of your curves, you've still got 
plenty in the arches, the candelabra and so on.
Now what does this look like with the external light sources media and so 
on? I'm sure the illusions of crossed and curved light beams will go away 
and interact well with the foreground.
DLM

Post a reply to this message