 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Still needs a lot of work, but this is what I have so far.
The stars I got from NOMAD don't completely match the stars that I see in
photographs; but I don't want to wait until next spring (northern hemisphere)
for this galaxy to swing into view so I can take a look myself.
I'm also getting hit or miss whether the absorbing media casts shadows.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'centaurus_a.jpg' (78 KB)
Preview of image 'centaurus_a.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 22.11.2013 00:07, schrieb Cousin Ricky:
> Still needs a lot of work, but this is what I have so far.
Looks like the CGSphere wave is just rolling across the POV-Ray
community :-D
Folks, if you happen to be using UberPOV, I suggest to follow
Fractracer's example and file your CGSphere submissions as rendered with
"POV-Ray". Consider it a family name.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
> Looks like the CGSphere wave is just rolling across the POV-Ray
> community :-D
Well, when Sam Benge submitted his multi-layered response to Shay's CSG
challenge, I thought, "That looks mighty spherical," so I finally got around to
joining the project. My post in p.b.i may have reminded POVers that CGSphere
exists.
I discovered that, by coincidence, Jerome had submitted 3 images to CGSphere
just before I did, but he never posted them here.
> Folks, if you happen to be using UberPOV, ...
well, that's an accepted risk when you go into the high tech business. :-P
(N.B. RC3Metal is one of my submissions to the Object Collection.)
> ...I suggest to follow
> Fractracer's example and file your CGSphere submissions as rendered with
> "POV-Ray". Consider it a family name.
I wouldn't think of doing otherwise.
On that note, all POV-Ray images prior to Jerome's were apparently submitted
before POV-Ray existed as a category, so if you want to see what other POVers
have done in the past, you'll have to choose "Other" under "Browse by Software."
About 5 years ago, Bill Pragnell experimented with modifying the grid plane,
which is contrary to all 6 Rules, but not well enforced. This experiment does
not appear to be manifested in the gallery.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Cousin Ricky wrote:
> Still needs a lot of work, but this is what I have so far.
nice one!
> The stars I got from NOMAD don't completely match the stars that I see in
> photographs; but I don't want to wait until next spring (northern hemisphere)
> for this galaxy to swing into view so I can take a look myself.
The appearance can change quite a bit due to proper motion and
different sensitivities of optical systems, and sensors, filters, ...
Compared to Stellarium your view seems reasonable.
For fun you might also try plate-solving your image at
http://nova.astrometry.net/upload
Also, if you haven't seen it yet you will like the 120 hour
exposure of amateur astronomer Rolf Olsen
http://www.rolfolsenastrophotography.com/Astrophotography/Centaurus-A-Extreme-Deep-Field
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christian Froeschlin <chr### [at] chrfrde> wrote:
> For fun you might also try plate-solving your image at
>
> http://nova.astrometry.net/upload
I submitted the star field without the galaxy or the grid plane. (The galaxy's
overexposed core obscured several stars which seem quite spurious to me.) It
returned "Success," but now I have a 529 KB text file that I don't know how to
interpret.
I don't know what to make of all those stars around the middle of the galaxy;
only one bright star shows up in photos. I'll likely screen them out in the
final image.
> Also, if you haven't seen it yet you will like the 120 hour
> exposure of amateur astronomer Rolf Olsen
>
>
http://www.rolfolsenastrophotography.com/Astrophotography/Centaurus-A-Extreme-Deep-Field
WHOA!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Cousin Ricky" <rickysttATyahooDOTcom> wrote:
> I discovered that, by coincidence, Jerome had submitted 3 images to CGSphere
> just before I did, but he never posted them here.
>
> On that note, all POV-Ray images prior to Jerome's were apparently submitted
> before POV-Ray existed as a category, so if you want to see what other POVers
> have done in the past, you'll have to choose "Other" under "Browse by Software."
>
> About 5 years ago, Bill Pragnell experimented with modifying the grid plane,
> which is contrary to all 6 Rules, but not well enforced. This experiment does
> not appear to be manifested in the gallery.
My image "Short Circuit" (from 4 years ago) is on page 3 of the "Other" software
category. I posted that image here first as "My first CGSphere" and apparently
that name carried over when it entered the POV-Ray HoF.
-------------------------------------------------
www.McGregorFineArt.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Cousin Ricky" <rickysttATyahooDOTcom> wrote:
> Still needs a lot of work, but this is what I have so far.
>
> The stars I got from NOMAD don't completely match the stars that I see in
> photographs; but I don't want to wait until next spring (northern hemisphere)
> for this galaxy to swing into view so I can take a look myself.
>
> I'm also getting hit or miss whether the absorbing media casts shadows.
I really like it.
Why is it that so many entries on the CGSphere website get posted, rated, and
commented as good, despite the fact that they completely ignore the rules?
Regards,
A.D.B.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26-11-2013 7:30, Anthony D. Baye wrote:
> Why is it that so many entries on the CGSphere website get posted, rated, and
> commented as good, despite the fact that they completely ignore the rules?
Nobody cares? Nobody knows the rules?
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 26/11/2013 09:02, Thomas de Groot a écrit :
> On 26-11-2013 7:30, Anthony D. Baye wrote:
>> Why is it that so many entries on the CGSphere website get posted,
>> rated, and
>> commented as good, despite the fact that they completely ignore the
>> rules?
>
> Nobody cares? Nobody knows the rules?
>
Some posts are part of a swarm: posters A, B & C come together and rate
each other with a 10. As lowering the note is strongly discouraged (you
have to post a comment to explain why you are rating below the current
average), it happens rarely.
For instance, my personal rating has points for the respect of the
rules, but that's only me.
--
Just because nobody complains does not mean all parachutes are perfect.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26-11-2013 15:19, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Some posts are part of a swarm: posters A, B & C come together and rate
> each other with a 10. As lowering the note is strongly discouraged (you
> have to post a comment to explain why you are rating below the current
> average), it happens rarely.
Hmm. A self-strengthening effect as it were, with a bit of
unfair-playing. Oh well. Almost like real life :-)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
