 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
So, the next batch of polyhedra. This little lot are the Johnson solids,
basically all the convex polyhedra composed only of regular polygons, that
aren't either Platonic or Archimedean solids. There's 92 of them, so I thought
the best way to show them off equally was another overhead view, in a spiral
pattern this time. Rather than use the glass again, I thought I'd go for a
polished stone look... mostly successful, I think.
(took 140 hours to render at 2000x2000 - eek!)
Bill
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'johnson_solids.jpg' (404 KB)
Preview of image 'johnson_solids.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> So, the next batch of polyhedra.
Very nice! You don't tire easily, do you? ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> This little lot are the Johnson solids,
> basically all the convex polyhedra composed only of regular polygons, that
> aren't either Platonic or Archimedean solids.
>
And also not the prisms and anitprisms.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christian Froeschlin <chr### [at] chrfr de> wrote:
> > So, the next batch of polyhedra.
>
> Very nice! You don't tire easily, do you? ;)
Well, this is mostly automated conversion, with tweaking. I can chip away at it
over weeks, and occasionally take a break for a nice render. Quite a restful
project really! :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Paul Fuller <pgf### [at] optusnetcomau> wrote:
> Bill Pragnell wrote:
> > This little lot are the Johnson solids,
> > basically all the convex polyhedra composed only of regular polygons, that
> > aren't either Platonic or Archimedean solids.
>
> And also not the prisms and anitprisms.
Ohyes, whoops, thank you.
If I include them I'll probably write a single algorithmic macro... but they're
not as interesting as the 59 icosahedra, so they'll have to wait :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
>
> Ohyes, whoops, thank you.
I only mentioned it because I initially thought you had missed them.
After all they are convex polyhedra composed of only regular polygons.
Then I found that the Johnson solids exclude them for a good reason.
>
> If I include them I'll probably write a single algorithmic macro... but they're
> not as interesting as the 59 icosahedra, so they'll have to wait :-)
>
>
Don't try to include them all or your parse time will be ... excessive.
Still a nice image of a double spiral of prism / antiprism pairs
spiralling outwards would add nicely to your zoo.
Keep up the good work.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Paul Fuller <pgf### [at] optusnetcomau> wrote:
> Don't try to include them all or your parse time will be ... excessive.
Hehe, nice euphemism.
> Still a nice image of a double spiral of prism / antiprism pairs
> spiralling outwards would add nicely to your zoo.
Good idea. Consider it on the list ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht
news:web.4a5a3f1e91c52d6cf6ec10440@news.povray.org...
> So, the next batch of polyhedra. This little lot are the Johnson solids,
> basically all the convex polyhedra composed only of regular polygons, that
> aren't either Platonic or Archimedean solids. There's 92 of them, so I
> thought
> the best way to show them off equally was another overhead view, in a
> spiral
> pattern this time. Rather than use the glass again, I thought I'd go for a
> polished stone look... mostly successful, I think.
>
> (took 140 hours to render at 2000x2000 - eek!)
>
> Bill
>
Oh, to let those shiny little things run tinkling through one's fingers....
More! I want more!
This is going to be an impressive collection, Bill.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I liked the other image more... It had that "wow!" factor to it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Well, this picture just isn't as sparkly since the textures are "just"
jadestone or marble... I guess if you would change the texture to
transparent glass with high refractive index they would look more
spectacular.
But let us be glad that not every stone is a sparkling diamond... it would
become boring after a while.
So: well done! I am looking forward for more :-)
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:4a5b4332$1@news.povray.org...
> I liked the other image more... It had that "wow!" factor to it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
