 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi there,
This is just a simple bullet made as a lathe object. I wanted to smooth the
sharp corners but I wasn't able to get any of the built-in curve types to work
for that purpose. I had to use a linear_spline and make faceted corners to round
them off. But anyway, you can't see any difference in the final product, which
is a 7.62 x 39mm cartidge. I selected that particular round because it's
historically important, and there happens to be a diagram showing the
measurements on the Wikipedia website. (Actually, only the casing is a
linear_spline. The bullet itself is a cubic_spline.)
Regards,
Dave Blandston
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'bullet.jpg' (148 KB)
Preview of image 'bullet.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Dave Blandston schrieb:
> Hi there,
>
> This is just a simple bullet made as a lathe object. I wanted to smooth the
> sharp corners but I wasn't able to get any of the built-in curve types to work
> for that purpose. I had to use a linear_spline and make faceted corners to round
> them off. But anyway, you can't see any difference in the final product, which
> is a 7.62 x 39mm cartidge. I selected that particular round because it's
> historically important, and there happens to be a diagram showing the
> measurements on the Wikipedia website. (Actually, only the casing is a
> linear_spline. The bullet itself is a cubic_spline.)
The shape looks good. But shouldn't the material be different? Pointed
projectiles made of (or coated with) a soft material such as copper
doesn't make any sense to me (I'd expect something like steel, maybe
with a core of lead), and I always thought the cartridge casing would
typically be made of brass.
Good-looking copper though. What settings did you use?
Area light could do with a smaller size (or further away) - the shadow
seems unnaturally soft for that small distance between bullet and wall.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/18/2010 2:30 PM, clipka wrote:
> Dave Blandston schrieb:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> This is just a simple bullet made as a lathe object. I wanted to
>> smooth the
>> sharp corners but I wasn't able to get any of the built-in curve types
>> to work
>> for that purpose. I had to use a linear_spline and make faceted
>> corners to round
>> them off. But anyway, you can't see any difference in the final
>> product, which
>> is a 7.62 x 39mm cartidge. I selected that particular round because it's
>> historically important, and there happens to be a diagram showing the
>> measurements on the Wikipedia website. (Actually, only the casing is a
>> linear_spline. The bullet itself is a cubic_spline.)
>
> The shape looks good. But shouldn't the material be different? Pointed
> projectiles made of (or coated with) a soft material such as copper
> doesn't make any sense to me (I'd expect something like steel, maybe
> with a core of lead), and I always thought the cartridge casing would
> typically be made of brass.
>
> Good-looking copper though. What settings did you use?
>
> Area light could do with a smaller size (or further away) - the shadow
> seems unnaturally soft for that small distance between bullet and wall.
No. the shell is brass, the bullet shown would be a military full
jacketed bullet, and copper alloy is the material of choice. Steel
would erode the barrels much too rapidly. The core, yes, that's lead.
Rich.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
> The shape looks good. But shouldn't the material be different? Pointed
> projectiles made of (or coated with) a soft material such as copper
> doesn't make any sense to me (I'd expect something like steel, maybe
> with a core of lead), and I always thought the cartridge casing would
> typically be made of brass.
>
> Good-looking copper though. What settings did you use?
>
> Area light could do with a smaller size (or further away) - the shadow
> seems unnaturally soft for that small distance between bullet and wall.
Thanks! I see that I made at least two major mistakes with the casing texture. I
added a slight granite normal to the casing, and made the specular highlights a
little too dull. My errors made it look like plastic. I think the military may
have painted their brass cases green. Here are the reference photos I used:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62x39mm
The copper is from metals.inc. It's T_Copper_3D without any modification.
You're right about the lighting. I get excited about using POV's cool features
and oftentimes I overdo it a little.
The shape of the bullet was very tricky for me. I'm trying to get a feel for the
curve types available with the lathe object (it would be great if the b_spline
type was available!!!) That's about as good as I could get the bullet to look.
I'll work on it some more...
I always appreciate your helpful comments!
Regards,
Dave Blandston
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Dave Blandston schrieb:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> This is just a simple bullet made as a lathe object. I wanted to
>> smooth the
>> sharp corners but I wasn't able to get any of the built-in curve types
>> to work
>> for that purpose. I had to use a linear_spline and make faceted
>> corners to round
>> them off. But anyway, you can't see any difference in the final
>> product, which
>> is a 7.62 x 39mm cartidge. I selected that particular round because it's
>> historically important, and there happens to be a diagram showing the
>> measurements on the Wikipedia website. (Actually, only the casing is a
>> linear_spline. The bullet itself is a cubic_spline.)
>
> The shape looks good. But shouldn't the material be different? Pointed
> projectiles made of (or coated with) a soft material such as copper
> doesn't make any sense to me (I'd expect something like steel, maybe
> with a core of lead), and I always thought the cartridge casing would
> typically be made of brass.
>
> Good-looking copper though. What settings did you use?
>
> Area light could do with a smaller size (or further away) - the shadow
> seems unnaturally soft for that small distance between bullet and wall.
Normaly, jacketed munitions are copper or brass.
There are iron or steel jacketed ones, but they are only used in special
cases where you absolutely need the harder munitions possible. But even
then, the munitions are normaly copper plated, and may be steel jacketed
only on the conical part, with a carbide tip.
Another thing in favor of copper: it's density is higher than steel or
iron. Around 5 - 5.5 for iron and it's alloys, about 7.5 for copper if I
remember corectly. Almost 50% higher.
Copper slide well in a steel barel, while steel tend to grind into the
barel. It's not only the hardness that mather, but also the different
crystaline structure of the different metals.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think you should work more on the textures. While the colors are
probably close to accurate, the finish and normals could use more work.
Try imitating something like:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2306/2360441422_caa80a0d05.jpg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 19/03/2010 03:26, Alain nous fit lire :
> Another thing in favor of copper: it's density is higher than steel or
> iron. Around 5 - 5.5 for iron and it's alloys, about 7.5 for copper if I
> remember corectly. Almost 50% higher.
(for water @ 1)
iron is about 8 (max at 7.8, adding carbon and other might drop it to
6.8), copper about 9 and lead about 11.3
Lead "advantage": toxic; "default": does not hold well under pressure
Now, if you want to play with uranium (non-radioactive/depleted), you
get a nice 18.9, nevertheless it is recommended to stay away of
plutonium (despite its nice 19.8)
Platinum (21) is a bit too expensive, even gold (19.3)... and tungsten
(19.6) is a bit too difficult to manufacture for bullets (well, if it
was really worth it... but it might be too brittle too)
>
> Copper slide well in a steel barel, while steel tend to grind into the
> barel. It's not only the hardness that mather, but also the different
> crystaline structure of the different metals.
Right. Also iron have a magnetic issue, as well as a rusting issue. (and
as rust make the metal expand... you end up unable to fire)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> I think you should work more on the textures. While the colors are
> probably close to accurate, the finish and normals could use more work.
> Try imitating something like:
>
> http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2306/2360441422_caa80a0d05.jpg
Good suggestion. Adding dents to the casing worked well. But I'm having a hard
time with the copper. This is what I've come up with so far...
By the way, this bullet is a 5.56 x 45 mm round instead of the 7.62 x 39 mm one.
Ironically, now that the bullet is available for use I found that it didn't
quite fit in the scene I made it for, which was a military-themed Metallica
picture. Oh well, it was fun to make and I'll probably find some other use for
it.
Regards,
Dave Blandston
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'bullet_5.56 x 45 mm.jpg' (153 KB)
Preview of image 'bullet_5.56 x 45 mm.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
> Le 19/03/2010 03:26, Alain nous fit lire :
>
> iron is about 8 (max at 7.8, adding carbon and other might drop it to
> 6.8), copper about 9 and lead about 11.3
> Lead "advantage": toxic; "default": does not hold well under pressure
> Now, if you want to play with uranium (non-radioactive/depleted), you
> get a nice 18.9, nevertheless it is recommended to stay away of
> plutonium (despite its nice 19.8)
>
> Platinum (21) is a bit too expensive, even gold (19.3)... and tungsten
> (19.6) is a bit too difficult to manufacture for bullets (well, if it
> was really worth it... but it might be too brittle too)
>
Don't forget silver. I hear it works especially well on vampires.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Le 19/03/2010 03:26, Alain nous fit lire :
>
>> Another thing in favor of copper: it's density is higher than steel or
>> iron. Around 5 - 5.5 for iron and it's alloys, about 7.5 for copper if I
>> remember corectly. Almost 50% higher.
OK, my memory played me some game.
> (for water @ 1)
> iron is about 8 (max at 7.8, adding carbon and other might drop it to
> 6.8), copper about 9 and lead about 11.3
> Lead "advantage": toxic; "default": does not hold well under pressure
> Now, if you want to play with uranium (non-radioactive/depleted), you
> get a nice 18.9, nevertheless it is recommended to stay away of
> plutonium (despite its nice 19.8)
>
> Platinum (21) is a bit too expensive, even gold (19.3)... and tungsten
> (19.6) is a bit too difficult to manufacture for bullets (well, if it
> was really worth it... but it might be too brittle too)
Tungsten carbide is used for the tips of some armor piercing amo.
>
>>
>> Copper slide well in a steel barel, while steel tend to grind into the
>> barel. It's not only the hardness that mather, but also the different
>> crystaline structure of the different metals.
>
> Right. Also iron have a magnetic issue, as well as a rusting issue. (and
> as rust make the metal expand... you end up unable to fire)
High density... take a look at osmium with a good 22.6, the highest you
can find. Problem, it's brittle, very difficult to work, very expensive,
and it's oxyde is extremely toxic.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
