 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 19-5-2019 11:58, Norbert Kern wrote:
> and here the image...
>
>
Question: shouldn't 'method 2' not be 'method 3' in the media?
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Norbert Kern wrote on 19/05/2019 11:58:
> and here the image...
>
>
Ethereal and relaxing.
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degroot org> wrote:
>
> This is very beautiful indeed. Can be anything, from a cityscape to a
> microchip, and everything in between.
>
> Thank you!
>
> --
> Thomas
I like the variability of the crackle pattern too - it can contain everything...
Norbert
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ton" <ton### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> > and here the image...
>
> It sure is nice enough to show.
> Well done.
>
> Cheers
> Ton.
Thank you very much
Norbert
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 19-5-2019 11:58, Norbert Kern wrote:
>
> Question: shouldn't 'method 2' not be 'method 3' in the media?
>
> --
> Thomas
I tried method 3, but it was slower, not better - but I made the test in an
early stage...
Norbert
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Paolo Gibellini <p.g### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Ethereal and relaxing.
> Paolo
That's a very kind comment - thank's for that
Norbert
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 20-5-2019 21:31, Norbert Kern wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> On 19-5-2019 11:58, Norbert Kern wrote:
>>
>> Question: shouldn't 'method 2' not be 'method 3' in the media?
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
>
> I tried method 3, but it was slower, not better - but I made the test in an
> early stage...
>
> Norbert
>
I suggest to use method 3 all right, but with a much lower samples
value: 600 instead of 1600 is already much faster and without
significant view deterioration. You can probably even lower it much
more. With samples 100 the image becomes a bit splotchy though.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> >
>
> I suggest to use method 3 all right, but with a much lower samples
> value: 600 instead of 1600 is already much faster and without
> significant view deterioration. You can probably even lower it much
> more. With samples 100 the image becomes a bit splotchy though.
>
> --
> Thomas
Here is a version with method 3 and a different color map.
I used 1000 samples and it took 3 days for a 8000*4500 render.
I'm not concinced...
Norbert
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'abstract_neuer25.jpg' (777 KB)
Preview of image 'abstract_neuer25.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hi,
"Norbert Kern" <nor### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> Here is a version with method 3 and a different color map.
> I used 1000 samples and it took 3 days for a 8000*4500 render.
how many physical monitors to make your desktop?! :-)
> I'm not concinced...
me neither, too .. busy. the green+blue works a lot better for me[*]. meant to
say thank you for the original (am using it as a wallpaper), 'ethereal' is the
perfect word I think.
[*] since Thomas said "from a cityscape to a microchip, and everything in
between", I can't help thinking: Greater Venice in the Year 2525, seen from an
aircraft. :-)
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26-5-2019 21:36, Norbert Kern wrote:
> Here is a version with method 3 and a different color map.
> I used 1000 samples and it took 3 days for a 8000*4500 render.
> I'm not concinced...
>
I do not really like that color_map...
I started a small test with version 3.8, method 3, 200 samples, and
using 6 threads. After about 35 minutes, this is the state of the matter.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'test.png' (306 KB)
Preview of image 'test.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
