 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This is what I've (mainly) been playing with since the last time:
background. The knots are zero-detail stand-ins, included to give an idea
of the whole scene, and the sky is unchanged from the last post. The big
addition is the cloud. I was a little unsatisfied with the empty
background, so I thought that some kind of skyscape could work quite well.
Unfortunately, I've not really used scattering media much, so this has been
a long journey of discovery!
The clouds are elongated spheroid functions (similar to the spherical
pattern), but each point on the surface is pushed around by a granite
pigment function. The distant trefoil is partly inside a cloud, and casts
long shadows through it. This was an accident of placement, I never
intended any of the knots to touch the clouds, but it looks really good so
I think I'll leave it!
Comments are welcome, especially regarding the clouds. I want to make them
as believable as possible :)
Bill
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'knot_test.jpg' (94 KB)
Preview of image 'knot_test.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill,
I've been following your knot thread with interest as you've handled all
sorts of CSG stuff with aplomb. What I don't understand is where you're
planning to go with your gravity defying structures. I guess the double
planetoid series is related? What then? A war of the worlds?
DLM
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"DLM" <me### [at] invalid spam> wrote:
> I've been following your knot thread with interest as you've handled all
> sorts of CSG stuff with aplomb. What I don't understand is where you're
> planning to go with your gravity defying structures. I guess the double
> planetoid series is related? What then? A war of the worlds?
Well, I guess the two are connected in that they both consist of
disembodied, airborne architecture, but I'm not currently intending to
combine them. My raytracing interests usually lean towards the
realistic-but-fantastical, i.e. "it can't exist, but this what it might
look like if it did", driven by a long-standing appreciation of sci-fi /
fantasy fiction. I just appear to be in flying-fortress mode at the moment!
:)
Bill
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht
news:web.440ee40c31ec8508731f01d10@news.povray.org...
> This is what I've (mainly) been playing with since the last time:
> background. The knots are zero-detail stand-ins, included to give an idea
> of the whole scene, and the sky is unchanged from the last post. The big
> addition is the cloud. I was a little unsatisfied with the empty
> background, so I thought that some kind of skyscape could work quite well.
> Unfortunately, I've not really used scattering media much, so this has
been
> a long journey of discovery!
>
> The clouds are elongated spheroid functions (similar to the spherical
> pattern), but each point on the surface is pushed around by a granite
> pigment function. The distant trefoil is partly inside a cloud, and casts
> long shadows through it. This was an accident of placement, I never
> intended any of the knots to touch the clouds, but it looks really good so
> I think I'll leave it!
>
> Comments are welcome, especially regarding the clouds. I want to make them
> as believable as possible :)
>
> Bill
>
Well done, Bill! I think the clouds are a very nice addition to the scene as
it gives some dimensional structure to the whole. Incidentally, it makes the
flying knots more believable! :-)
Concerning the clouds themselves, I believe them to be quite naturalistic.
Maybe the spherical basic function is shinning through a bit too much? Some
warp might be asked for perhaps? Well, just my own feeling.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> WROTE:
>
> The clouds are elongated spheroid functions (similar to the spherical
> pattern), but each point on the surface is pushed around by a granite
> pigment function. The distant trefoil is partly inside a cloud, and casts
> long shadows through it. This was an accident of placement, I never
> intended any of the knots to touch the clouds, but it looks really good so
> I think I'll leave it!
>
> Comments are welcome, especially regarding the clouds. I want to make them
> as believable as possible :)
>
> Bill
>
Your clods are fascinating, but I haven't understood how did you realized
them, what's exactly meaning "pushing" a point of a surface?
Thank you in advance,
;-)
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Paolo Gibellini" <p.g### [at] teinoscom> wrote:
> Your clods are fascinating, but I haven't understood how did you realized
> them, what's exactly meaning "pushing" a point of a surface?
Sorry, it wasn't phrased very rigorously, I was just being colourful. The
density function I use is:
#local sc = 2.5;
function { (1-min(1,sqrt(x*x+y*y/9+z*z) + 0.5*gran(x/sc,y/sc,z/sc).x)) }
where gran(x,y,z) is just a simple granite pigment function (no scaling or
anything), producing clouds of scale approximately <1,3,1>. The density_map
then uses a sharp step to produce "solid" looking clouds. Of course, the
granite perturbation is applied to every point in the density, not just the
surface.
hope that helps!
Bill
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> "Bill Pragnell" wrote
> Sorry, it wasn't phrased very rigorously, I was just being colourful. The
> density function I use is:
>
> #local sc = 2.5;
> function { (1-min(1,sqrt(x*x+y*y/9+z*z) + 0.5*gran(x/sc,y/sc,z/sc).x)) }
>
> where gran(x,y,z) is just a simple granite pigment function (no scaling or
> anything), producing clouds of scale approximately <1,3,1>. The
density_map
> then uses a sharp step to produce "solid" looking clouds. Of course, the
> granite perturbation is applied to every point in the density, not just
the
> surface.
>
> hope that helps!
> Bill
>
It helps a lot, thank you!
;-)
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
