 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Of course, if I'm going to get in on this blurred reflective goodness, I'll be
using a standard test object...
me like
Bill
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'blurred_knot01.jpg' (109 KB)
Preview of image 'blurred_knot01.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 09/12/2013 23:35, Bill Pragnell wrote:
> Of course, if I'm going to get in on this blurred reflective goodness, I'll be
> using a standard test object...
>
> me like
>
> Bill
>
Nice one, Bill
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Doctor John <j.g### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> On 09/12/2013 23:35, Bill Pragnell wrote:
> > Of course, if I'm going to get in on this blurred reflective goodness, I'll be
> > using a standard test object...
> >
> > me like
> >
> > Bill
> >
> Nice one, Bill
>
It is but he could have polished a bit more. The reflections are a but blurry.
;-)
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10-12-2013 0:35, Bill Pragnell wrote:
> Of course, if I'm going to get in on this blurred reflective goodness, I'll be
> using a standard test object...
>
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Bill Pragnell on date 10/12/2013 0.35 wrote:
> Of course, if I'm going to get in on this blurred reflective goodness, I'll be
> using a standard test object...
>
> me like
>
> Bill
>
A very good image!
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Of course, if I'm going to get in on this blurred reflective goodness, I'll be
> using a standard test object...
>
> me like
>
> Bill
That's an acceptable noise level. what was your setup and render time?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Mr" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> That's an acceptable noise level. what was your setup and render time?
Yeah it's ok. Antialiasing 0.1, max trace level 20, some (probably unnecessary)
radiosity, and a 9x9 area light... took just over 2.5 hours but this was on a
2007 macbook (32-bit, 1.8GHz dual-core). I didn't change any supersampling
options so I expect it could be made faster, and I'm sure a more modern
multicore system would monster it.
I've got something more complex cooking in the meantime (2.5 days so far)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Of course, if I'm going to get in on this blurred reflective goodness, I'll be
> using a standard test object...
>
> me like
>
> Bill
and very nice it is too.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
