POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.binaries.images : Snow-covered mountains (68 k) Server Time
4 Nov 2024 22:17:42 EST (-0500)
  Snow-covered mountains (68 k) (Message 1 to 4 of 4)  
From: helge h
Subject: Snow-covered mountains (68 k)
Date: 27 Jan 2006 20:20:01
Message: <web.43dac5cbbefea50a324f231f0@news.povray.org>
This isn't a very interesting picture, but I wanted to present the
technique: one height-field made from a noisy and sharp image (with the
rock texture on it), and another height-field made from a copy of the
first, but blurred considerably (with the snow texture). They are both
scaled exactly the same, but the blurring of the second will make it lower
where the peaks are on the first, and higher _around_ the peaks. Easier
done than said:

--
#local Mountain = height_field {
 jpeg "mountain.jpg" // sharp, noisy image
 smooth
}

#local Snow = height_field {
 jpeg "snow.jpg" // blurred version of mountain.jpg
 smooth
}

union {
 object { Mountain scale <100,10,100> texture { Terrain } }
 object { Snow scale <100,10,100> texture { Snow_tx } }
}
--

I used the same heightfield combination four times in the image, and it was
interesting to see that by declaring the height-fields first (as in the
code above), the parse-time was shorter than just writing the height-fields
into every union of the combined objects. The mountain.jpg image is 1024 by
1024 pixels, but still there are some 'staircase' patterns, especially on
the left. The snow.jpg is only 256 by 256, maybe that is what causes this.

Also, it rendered slower than I expected, as some part of the height-field
(height-field cell I think it was) only had about 6 percent success-rate.

H


Post a reply to this message


Attachments:
Download 'snowscape.jpg' (66 KB)

Preview of image 'snowscape.jpg'
snowscape.jpg


 

From: dlm
Subject: Re: Snow-covered mountains (68 k)
Date: 27 Jan 2006 23:51:49
Message: <43daf865$1@news.povray.org>
clever!
the possibilities are boundless.
DLM


Post a reply to this message

From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Snow-covered mountains (68 k)
Date: 28 Jan 2006 03:01:50
Message: <43db24ee@news.povray.org>
"helge_h" <nomail@nomail> schreef in bericht
news:web.43dac5cbbefea50a324f231f0@news.povray.org...
> This isn't a very interesting picture, but I wanted to present the
> technique: one height-field made from a noisy and sharp image (with the
> rock texture on it), and another height-field made from a copy of the
> first, but blurred considerably (with the snow texture). They are both
> scaled exactly the same, but the blurring of the second will make it lower
> where the peaks are on the first, and higher _around_ the peaks. Easier
> done than said:
>

You can also increase or decrease the amount of snow by translating the snow
height_field along y; or more in the shadows by translating along x or z.

Thomas


Post a reply to this message

From: Kenneth
Subject: Re: Snow-covered mountains (68 k)
Date: 29 Jan 2006 03:20:01
Message: <web.43dc7a5576b7d161dc21d980@news.povray.org>
The sharp peaks remind me of Zion National Park. I hiked (climbed?)
something like that years ago.

The "valley" rocks look like they've been scoured by a glacier. Nice.

Ken


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.