I was actually running some radiosity tests, with crazy settings... and the
basics of this image popped out.

Both the height_field for the ground and the cylinder have simple rgb 1.0
pigments (except for the pure-red color addition, with some turbulence.) Other
than that, the colorful 'painterly' look is a pure radiosity effect.

There are no lights in the scene, just rad illumination...which comes from two
multi-colored jpeg image_maps that I made in Photoshop, applied to thin boxes
(like billboards) and positioned at appropriate places in the scene. They have
the no_image keyword applied. The paint-like color patches on the objects come
from radiosity's random processing of those colors. (I've always liked
radiosity's ability to produce very defined color patches like this, by using
some extreme settings.)

I don't know what to call this image, but it happened to look creepy.

Happy Halloween!

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'radiosity_as_art_painting_10_2020.jpg' (505 KB)

Preview of image 'radiosity_as_art_painting_10_2020.jpg'

Op 31/10/2020 om 06:57 schreef Kenneth:
> I was actually running some radiosity tests, with crazy settings... and the
> basics of this image popped out.
> 
> Both the height_field for the ground and the cylinder have simple rgb 1.0
> pigments (except for the pure-red color addition, with some turbulence.) Other
> than that, the colorful 'painterly' look is a pure radiosity effect.
> 
> There are no lights in the scene, just rad illumination...which comes from two
> multi-colored jpeg image_maps that I made in Photoshop, applied to thin boxes
> (like billboards) and positioned at appropriate places in the scene. They have
> the no_image keyword applied. The paint-like color patches on the objects come
> from radiosity's random processing of those colors. (I've always liked
> radiosity's ability to produce very defined color patches like this, by using
> some extreme settings.)
> 
> I don't know what to call this image, but it happened to look creepy.
> 
> Happy Halloween!
> 

Walmart (or whichever) should have chopping blocks? You definitely are 
in need of a new one. :-)

Well done.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:

> I don't know what to call this image, but it happened to look creepy.

Van Gogh's Tower of Blood?
Bloody Night?

It definitely has that Van Gogh look to it.





Please keep children and small animals away from this man.

Post a reply to this message

"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>
> > I don't know what to call this image, but it happened to look creepy.
>
> Van Gogh's Tower of Blood?
> Bloody Night?
>
> It definitely has that Van Gogh look to it.

Van Gogh meets Monet meets Edgar Allan Poe.

Post a reply to this message

>
> Walmart (or whichever) should have chopping blocks? You definitely are
> in need of a new one. :-)
>
>
> Please keep children and small animals away from this man.

A chopping block-- that didn't occur to me (!!!)

Gee, I was just making an innocent little cylinder, with an innocent craggy top
and some innocent red color as a point of interest... (ha!)

Yep, as they say: Art is definitely in 'the eye of the beholder'

Someone needs some psychiatric help here :-P :-P :-P

(Who, me?)

Post a reply to this message

This is the image_map I made in PS to shed the radiosity light; it's applied to
both 'cards' in the scene. (I now realize that I could have made the same image
in POV-ray, using the spherical or onion pattern. Duh.)

The cards used  finish{ambient 0 emission 1 diffuse 0}, then I varied the
diffuse value of the scene's real objects (much greater than 1.0, as it turned
out, just to visually balance the composition.)

Strangely, I didn't *conciously* choose the cards' colors to be somewhat
complementary to each other-- the image_map started as just a 'generic'
rad-lighting test-- but these particular colors probably have a lot to do with
the resulting 'painterly' look.

I want to do a test now (another test??!) to randomly vary those three colors,
to see the visual effect of the radiosity trick.

And maybe those colors should not be shaped like simple concentric discs, but
perhaps like three 'rough-outline paint blobs' on an artist's pallette. Maybe
the rad trick would display its light 'patches' as more blob-like as a result,
shaped more like real brush-strokes. (Just a wild guess at this point.)

The crazy radiosity settings I used:
brightness 1
recursion_limit 1
always_sample off
low_error_factor 5
count 100
minimum_reuse .001 // this and maximum_reuse are the important values
maximum_reuse .012
nearest_count 1

The other values are at their defaults.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'rad_tester.jpg' (113 KB)

Preview of image 'rad_tester.jpg'

"Cousin Ricky" <rickysttATyahooDOTcom> wrote:
>
> Van Gogh meets Monet meets Edgar Allan Poe.

I like that! It seems like a perfect analogy.

Post a reply to this message

"Cousin Ricky" <rickysttATyahooDOTcom> wrote:
> "Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> > "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> >
> > > I don't know what to call this image, but it happened to look creepy.
> >
> > Van Gogh's Tower of Blood?
> > Bloody Night?
> >
> > It definitely has that Van Gogh look to it.
>
> Van Gogh meets Monet meets Edgar Allan Poe.

Stir in a bit of Jackson Pollack, Farrah Fawcett, and Marina Abramović ....

Post a reply to this message

Op 31/10/2020 om 19:14 schreef Kenneth:
> This is the image_map I made in PS to shed the radiosity light; it's applied to
> both 'cards' in the scene. (I now realize that I could have made the same image
> in POV-ray, using the spherical or onion pattern. Duh.)
> 
> The cards used  finish{ambient 0 emission 1 diffuse 0}, then I varied the
> diffuse value of the scene's real objects (much greater than 1.0, as it turned
> out, just to visually balance the composition.)
> 
> Strangely, I didn't *conciously* choose the cards' colors to be somewhat
> complementary to each other-- the image_map started as just a 'generic'
> rad-lighting test-- but these particular colors probably have a lot to do with
> the resulting 'painterly' look.
> 
> I want to do a test now (another test??!) to randomly vary those three colors,
> to see the visual effect of the radiosity trick.
> 
> And maybe those colors should not be shaped like simple concentric discs, but
> perhaps like three 'rough-outline paint blobs' on an artist's pallette. Maybe
> the rad trick would display its light 'patches' as more blob-like as a result,
> shaped more like real brush-strokes. (Just a wild guess at this point.)
> 
> The crazy radiosity settings I used:
> brightness 1
> recursion_limit 1
> always_sample off
> low_error_factor 5
> count 100
> minimum_reuse .001 // this and maximum_reuse are the important values
> maximum_reuse .012
> nearest_count 1
> 
> The other values are at their defaults.
> 
> 

This is a smart effect and I never would have thought of using radiosity 
in such a way. I am going to have to play with this! Thanks for sharing!

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

hi,

"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> "Cousin Ricky" <rickysttATyahooDOTcom> wrote:
> > "Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> > > "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't know what to call this image, but it happened to look creepy.
> > >
> > > Van Gogh's Tower of Blood?
> > > Bloody Night?
> > >
> > > It definitely has that Van Gogh look to it.
> >
> > Van Gogh meets Monet meets Edgar Allan Poe.
>
> Stir in a bit of Jackson Pollack, Farrah Fawcett, and Marina Abramović ....

what, no (Edvard) Munch??


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message