 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hey everyone! Been a long time!
I found myself in need of a creative outlet, and so I dug up my old POV files.
When last I left off years ago, I had been working on trying to get more
interesting water formations in my landscapes. I had apparently stopped mid-way
through a little algorithm for tracing the flow of streams through the
landscape, forming lakes in the valleys. I decided to try and finish it out a
little more.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'water3.jpg' (378 KB)
Preview of image 'water3.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 02/14/2017 02:01 PM, Kirk Andrews wrote:
> Hey everyone! Been a long time!
>
> I found myself in need of a creative outlet, and so I dug up my old POV files.
> When last I left off years ago, I had been working on trying to get more
> interesting water formations in my landscapes. I had apparently stopped mid-way
> through a little algorithm for tracing the flow of streams through the
> landscape, forming lakes in the valleys. I decided to try and finish it out a
> little more.
>
Cool - and welcome back!
What general approach are you using?
Bill P.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Cool - and welcome back!
>
> What general approach are you using?
>
> Bill P.
Thanks!
test points in a circle to find the lowest point nearby, build a cone from here
to there, and repeat. If we find ourselves in a valley, we'll keep expanding our
test radius until we find a way out, and fill it up with a cylinder as we go.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/14/2017 8:26 PM, Kirk Andrews wrote:
>> Cool - and welcome back!
>>
>> What general approach are you using?
>>
>> Bill P.
>
> Thanks!
>
> It's pretty simplistic – we start a stream in at a random location, use trace to
> test points in a circle to find the lowest point nearby, build a cone from here
> to there, and repeat. If we find ourselves in a valley, we'll keep expanding our
> test radius until we find a way out, and fill it up with a cylinder as we go.
>
Isn't that what water does in RL?
It looks good.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Isn't that what water does in RL?
> It looks good.
>
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
Well, I suppose to really get it down we'd probably want to factor in some
inertia.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/14/2017 9:48 PM, Kirk Andrews wrote:
>> Isn't that what water does in RL?
>> It looks good.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards
>> Stephen
>
> Well, I suppose to really get it down we'd probably want to factor in some
> inertia.
>
No, to get the water down you just need gravity. :-)
Seriously, Would you intend to make close ups or an animation? These
landscapes are generally quite static over short time spans. (I am sure
Thomas might have an opinion.)
It actually gives me an impression of the Scottish Highlands with
interconnected lochs. It can't be because the sun is shining and it
doesn't look cold. ;-)
I like the pattern of vegetation as well.
How long did it take to parse and render?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 14-2-2017 23:17, Stephen wrote:
> On 2/14/2017 9:48 PM, Kirk Andrews wrote:
>>> Isn't that what water does in RL?
>>> It looks good.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Stephen
>>
>> Well, I suppose to really get it down we'd probably want to factor in
>> some
>> inertia.
>>
>
> No, to get the water down you just need gravity. :-)
> Seriously, Would you intend to make close ups or an animation? These
> landscapes are generally quite static over short time spans. (I am sure
> Thomas might have an opinion.)
>
Oh, I do! I do! This is coming at a time when I have been wondering how
to fill those valleys with streams. Lately, I have been working with a
combination and alternation of Wilbur, Bryce, Terrabrush, GeoControl,
and World Machine on the same height_field, to generate landscapes where
river valleys are eroded down. Problem is the water and I have not got
that far indeed. So, I am quite interested in this development. It is
looking very good!
> It actually gives me an impression of the Scottish Highlands with
> interconnected lochs. It can't be because the sun is shining and it
> doesn't look cold. ;-)
> I like the pattern of vegetation as well.
> How long did it take to parse and render?
>
>
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kirk Andrews wrote on 14/02/2017 20:01:
> Hey everyone! Been a long time!
>
> I found myself in need of a creative outlet, and so I dug up my old POV files.
> When last I left off years ago, I had been working on trying to get more
> interesting water formations in my landscapes. I had apparently stopped mid-way
> through a little algorithm for tracing the flow of streams through the
> landscape, forming lakes in the valleys. I decided to try and finish it out a
> little more.
>
I like it, especially the details like rivers and clouds.
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degroot org> wrote:
> Oh, I do! I do! This is coming at a time when I have been wondering how
> to fill those valleys with streams. Lately, I have been working with a
> combination and alternation of Wilbur, Bryce, Terrabrush, GeoControl,
> and World Machine on the same height_field, to generate landscapes where
> river valleys are eroded down. Problem is the water and I have not got
> that far indeed. So, I am quite interested in this development. It is
> looking very good!
> --
> Thomas
That erosion element is the missing piece here, of course. This scene looks like
it's never rained here before, and there are no actual streams or lake beds,
just water pouring over the surface.
I've made some improvements and have been trying to get another render done, but
unfortunately, I seem to be running into a bug with my build of POV running on
this Mac (the last of my PCs died a couple months ago). It'll parse fine, and
start rendering just fine, but it keeps crashing and closing mid render.
You're more than welcome to see what you can do with it though!
https://www.dropbox.com/s/1j0kes0x79u9zz9/Water3.pov?dl=0
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> No, to get the water down you just need gravity. :-)
> Seriously, Would you intend to make close ups or an animation? These
> landscapes are generally quite static over short time spans. (I am sure
> Thomas might have an opinion.)
>
> It actually gives me an impression of the Scottish Highlands with
> interconnected lochs. It can't be because the sun is shining and it
> doesn't look cold. ;-)
> I like the pattern of vegetation as well.
> How long did it take to parse and render?
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
I haven't played too much with animation, but suppose you could. It's not going
to look too fantastic if you do a close up of those streams, since they're made
of cones and spheres. You'd definitely be able to tell that up close.
I've thought that maybe I could switch to building a mesh for the streams
instead; that would probably yield better close-up potential.
At the moment, it takes about half a second per stream to parse. There are about
100 streams in this render. If I don't have other settings cranked up too high,
render times are just a few minutes right now.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
