Can anyone guess why this render made me cry?

($$!)

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'capture_06082006_161923.png' (49 KB)

Preview of image 'capture_06082006_161923.png'

EagleSun wrote:
> Can anyone guess why this render made me cry?
> 
> ($$!)
> 

Slartibastfart and his companies sued you?

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
   http://www.zbxt.net
      aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

"EagleSun" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message 
news:web.4489c7549a107ae6841337530@news.povray.org...
> Can anyone guess why this render made me cry?
> 
> ($$!)

because it's so good you had the feeling you were leaving earth and you 
were getting homesick?

cu!
-- 
#macro G(b,e)b+(e-b)*C/50#end#macro _(b,e,k,l)#local C=0;#while(C<50)
sphere{G(b,e)+3*z.1pigment{rgb G(k,l)}finish{ambient 1}}#local C=C+1;
#end#end _(y-x,y,x,x+y)_(y,-x-y,x+y,y)_(-x-y,-y,y,y+z)_(-y,y,y+z,x+y)
_(0x+y.5+y/2x)_(0x-y.5+y/2x)            // ZK http://www.povplace.com

Post a reply to this message

"EagleSun" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Can anyone guess why this render made me cry?


Antialiasing?

Norbert Kern

Post a reply to this message

"EagleSun" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Can anyone guess why this render made me cry?


Now I can see it!
You are crying, because you'll never compare your render with the real
thing?


Norbert Kern

Post a reply to this message

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

EagleSun wrote:
> Can anyone guess why this render made me cry?
> 
> ($$!)
> 
	Because it took 2 weeks to render despite the small resolution?

		Jerome
- --
+------------------------- Jerome M. BERGER ---------------------+
|    mailto:jeb### [at] freefr      | ICQ:    238062172            |
|    http://jeberger.free.fr/     | Jabber: jeb### [at] jabberfr   |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------+
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEidrcd0kWM4JG3k8RAuc/AJ9Q24si/S2taxUTLZ7qOafeHESkNgCgsrF/
P4ZZFl1JcGZzYzaXBybzjJU=
=qAV2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Post a reply to this message

Please tell me you are joking.

Nice image though

Post a reply to this message

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22J=E9r=F4me_M=2E_Berger=22?= <jeb### [at] freefr> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> EagleSun wrote:
> > Can anyone guess why this render made me cry?
> >
> > ($$!)
> >
>  Because it took 2 weeks to render despite the small resolution?
>
>   Jerome
> - --
> +------------------------- Jerome M. BERGER ---------------------+
> |    mailto:jeb### [at] freefr      | ICQ:    238062172            |
> |    http://jeberger.free.fr/     | Jabber: jeb### [at] jabberfr   |
> +---------------------------------+------------------------------+
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFEidrcd0kWM4JG3k8RAuc/AJ9Q24si/S2taxUTLZ7qOafeHESkNgCgsrF/
> P4ZZFl1JcGZzYzaXBybzjJU=
> =qAV2
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

BOOM!  Oh how I wish all you guys's comments were true and that I was
joking... unfortunately, Jeberger guessed correctly (sortof...)

I found a parameter that can lead to a perfect render of earth, it's called
"sample".  I entered some blow-out number and clicked on "Run" to render
the image.  And yes, I forgot to turn on anti-alias.

Despite its small size, this render took 1 HOUR to render a simple 256^2
image!

This gets worse...

I'm working on a movie where the screen resolution will be 1280 x 720.
Assume I don't need to anti-alias (which I do), I'll render a single frame
for about 14 hours!  Since the scene should be about 2 minutes long, where
the frame rate will be 24 fps, that's going to take me 40 THOUSAND HOURS!
In simple terms, this translates to 1,687.5 days, or 4 years and 7 months..
assuming optimal and continuous rendering conditions 24x7 on a 2.6 GHz
system!

Post a reply to this message

> that's going to take me 40 THOUSAND HOURS!

www.imp.org :)


HTH,
Florian

Post a reply to this message

EagleSun wrote:

> Can anyone guess why this render made me cry?

Because it took forever and you realize you want a different part of the 
planet showing?

Because you forgot the stars?  (Don't worry--stars are actually too 
faint to see in a picture in which the earth is only this bright.)

Because it isn't your render, but you wish it were?  (kidding!)

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message