 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Dave Blandston" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> The still looks great, but the animation isn't showing up in
> "povray.binaries.animations" for me. I NEED to see it, darn it!!!
>
Thanks! And sorry--I ran into a file-size-limit problem; my first try was with
a file size of 4.9MB, which wouldn't fit into the 5MB limit(!) Ditto trying a
4.5MB file. But it's there now (a 3.8MB file was a success!) I remember, back
when the animation size limit was increased, that there was some 'overhead' of
some kind that needed to be taken into account. *Seems* that 4MB is about the
practical limit.
Ken
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Dre" <and### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> Holy crap! Consider me impressed! Very impressed!!!
>
Thanks! It was a labor of love--well, sort of, after solving umpteen problems.
But big scenes are always 'instructive'--I always learn some new things (and
they really give POV-Ray a workout, clarifying its strengths and weaknesses.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hey, machine guns! Cool! OK, I can't really take time to leave much of a comment
now, I'm too busy pushing the "Play" button over and over...
Wow! Everything is so well done it's amazing. The detailed objects and textures
make the scene very interesting.
There's a brief moment, I think around the two - three second mark, where the
smoke from the burning engine doesn't appear to be blowing backward as fast as
would be expected based on the speed of the passing clouds. Maybe it's my
imagination.
The reflections on the body of the disabled plane are great. I also like how the
other planes' contrails follow their motion from previous frames. Great
attention to detail.
Regards,
Dave Blandston
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Wow, high marks indeed! Great modeling. There are many things I could ask but
I'd like to know what approach you took for the ground and the motion. You did
a good job at creating an unsteady camera.
Charles
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Truly amazing work, Kenneth. I am literally speachless.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stunning. The image is superb, but it simply gives no hint as to the realism and
immediacy conveyed by the animation. I almost can't believe it was done with
POV-Ray!
Gonna watch this a few times more :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25/03/2010 16:27, Kenneth wrote:
> Thanks! And sorry--I ran into a file-size-limit problem; my first try was with
> a file size of 4.9MB, which wouldn't fit into the 5MB limit(!) Ditto trying a
> 4.5MB file. But it's there now (a 3.8MB file was a success!) I remember, back
> when the animation size limit was increased, that there was some 'overhead' of
> some kind that needed to be taken into account. *Seems* that 4MB is about the
> practical limit.
I can host it on povray.org in a temp dir if you like. pop me an email if so.
-- Chris
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Stunning. The image is superb, but it simply gives no hint as to the realism and
> immediacy conveyed by the animation. I almost can't believe it was done with
> POV-Ray!
>
> Gonna watch this a few times more :)
Thanks indeed! I tried to put as much detail into it the scene as I
could--without going overboard. For example, most of the panel line detail on
the bomber isn't really 'correct'--I took a basic 'net-acquired blueprint of the
plane (typical line art, as usual) cleaned it up a bit, made the other parts of
the image transparent, then simply projected it down onto the B-29 as an
image_map, an additional overlay texture. (Luckily the bomber is mostly
symmetrical from top to bottom!) But then I just *had* to add some rivets, and
decals, and...
KW
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Dave Blandston" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> There's a brief moment, I think around the two - three second mark, where the
> smoke from the burning engine doesn't appear to be blowing backward as fast as
> would be expected based on the speed of the passing clouds.
>
That's...entirely possible! ;-) Getting the speed of everything to match up
took some doing (and COUNTLESS viewings of the animation.) Basically because the
camera itself *isn't* moving (in z), while everything else is. I used the moving
puffy clouds as a kind of 'standard speed marker' for everything else...they
were the first things I added to the scene, after the B-29. And since the black
smoke media has its own moving 'bumps' density pattern (and scaling, of course),
getting it to visually match the other scene movements wasn't exactly a walk in
the park. (In fact, I think I may have *cheated* it's speed, to look correct
even though it wasn't) But the speed doesn't change during the
animation--AFAIK!--so the odd glitch you're seeing *could* be just an effect of
the temporarily alignment of certain moving elements. Or the 'foreshortening'
effect of the slightly telephoto camera lens setting (compressing everything in
z.)
OR, I simply could have screwed up... :-[ My eyeballs got fatigued from looking
at this damn scene so many times. I'll examine my code to see.
KW
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Charles C" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Wow, high marks indeed! Great modeling. There are many things I could ask but
> I'd like to know what approach you took for the ground and the motion. You did
> a good job at creating an unsteady camera.
>
Thank you! I have a few time-saving 'tools' that I've constructed over the last
couple of years that I regularly use now in my animations (and that I've been
*meaning* to post.) The shaking-camera look comes from one such tool, basically
a random-spline generator--a macro (but designed for animation). I've since
discovered that it has MANY more uses. It's all over this scene, in various
places--the contrails, the dipping/turning of the airplane, etc. Sometimes
modified, sometimes not. In fact, this scene helped me 'optimize' the code for
it.
The ground is just a B&W satellite image (of Paris!) that I 'colorized', and
applied to a plane, with some movement of the image_map in z. There are also
tens of thousands of buildings down there (simple boxes, in random sizes and
groupings)--which really can't be seen too clearly. But the ground just didn't
look 'correct' without them--kind of a subliminal detail. I guess.
Ken
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
