"Chris R" <car### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
> Close-up view of a scene I am working on of a bocce court.
>
> -- Chris R

Here's the wider view.  Still working on some details.

-- Chris R

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'scene.png' (3924 KB)

Preview of image 'scene.png'

Am 12.06.2024 um 22:09 schrieb Chris R:
> "Chris R" <car### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
>> Close-up view of a scene I am working on of a bocce court.
>>
>> -- Chris R
> 
> Here's the wider view.  Still working on some details.
> 
> -- Chris R
Very nice start! The balls look great. IMO, in the first picture their 
texture is better emphasised by the lighting. In the second image, 
nature could do with more irregularities, especially the wheat.

Best regards
Michael

Post a reply to this message

"Chris R" <car### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
> "Chris R" <car### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
> > Close-up view of a scene I am working on of a bocce court.


> Here's the wider view.  Still working on some details.


That wood texture you made looks fantastic!
Especially the dents, cracks, and growth rings with the rough end-grain.

You do some nice work.

-BE

Post a reply to this message

MichaelJF <fri### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> Am 12.06.2024 um 22:09 schrieb Chris R:
> > "Chris R" <car### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
> >> Close-up view of a scene I am working on of a bocce court.
> >>
> >> -- Chris R
> >
> > Here's the wider view.  Still working on some details.
> >
> > -- Chris R
> Very nice start! The balls look great. IMO, in the first picture their
> texture is better emphasised by the lighting. In the second image,
> nature could do with more irregularities, especially the wheat.
>
> Best regards
> Michael

Thanks!  The only difference between the two images is the camera location and
the focus point, so I'm a bit puzzled why the close-up is so much darker, (and
better).  I'm playing with changing the time of day or just reducing the
brightness of the sun for the second view to get better lighting on the bocce
balls.

The wheat is a mesh object generated by Arbaro.  I'll have to go back and see if
the model included enough variance.  Otherwise I may have to generate a few
smaller wheats with different random seeds and merge them together.

-- Chris R

Post a reply to this message

"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> "Chris R" <car### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
> > "Chris R" <car### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
> > > Close-up view of a scene I am working on of a bocce court.
>
>
> > Here's the wider view.  Still working on some details.
>
>
> That wood texture you made looks fantastic!
> Especially the dents, cracks, and growth rings with the rough end-grain.
>
> You do some nice work.
>
> -BE

Thanks!  I do a lot of scenes with rough wood, so I've developed quite a few
techniques.  This one was a lot of fiddling with pigment functions to put the
dents in logical places.

One of the things that really helps with this is having a version of
f_rounded_box that more accurately returns the distance of a point from the
surface of the box.  That allows me to simply add/subtract other pigment
functions with a depth I can model to the shape function in the isosurface.
It's much slower than the built-in f_rounded_box, but gives more controllable
results.

-- Chris R

Post a reply to this message

"Chris R" <car### [at] comcastnet> wrote:

> One of the things that really helps with this is having a version of
> f_rounded_box that more accurately returns the distance of a point from the
> surface of the box.  That allows me to simply add/subtract other pigment
> functions with a depth I can model to the shape function in the isosurface.
> It's much slower than the built-in f_rounded_box, but gives more controllable
> results.

Interesting.
What equation are you using?

I'm wondering if you might benefit from this:

https://iquilezles.org/articles/distfunctions/

- BW

Post a reply to this message

> Thanks!  The only difference between the two images is the camera location and
> the focus point, so I'm a bit puzzled why the close-up is so much darker, (and
> better).  I'm playing with changing the time of day or just reducing the
> brightness of the sun for the second view to get better lighting on the bocce
> balls.
This is a riddle indeed. Changing camera location and look_at only 
cannot cause this difference. Apart from a severe change of the 
radiosity settings, I have no idea what could darken the first image so 
much.

Best regards
Michael

Post a reply to this message

Hi(gh)!

On 13.06.24 21:06, MichaelJF wrote:

> Very nice start! The balls look great. IMO, in the first picture their 
> texture is better emphasised by the lighting. In the second image, 
> nature could do with more irregularities, especially the wheat.

Yes, I also think so... and shouldn't the wheat be of a warmer yellow, 
i. e. more red in the mix? Depending on the degree of ripeness of course...

See you in Khyberspace!

Now playing: 52 Girls (The B-52's)

-- 
VBI BENE, IBI BACTRIA!

Post a reply to this message

"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> "Chris R" <car### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
>
> > One of the things that really helps with this is having a version of
> > f_rounded_box that more accurately returns the distance of a point from the
> > surface of the box.  That allows me to simply add/subtract other pigment
> > functions with a depth I can model to the shape function in the isosurface.
> > It's much slower than the built-in f_rounded_box, but gives more controllable
> > results.
>
> Interesting.
> What equation are you using?
>
> I'm wondering if you might benefit from this:
>
> https://iquilezles.org/articles/distfunctions/
>
> - BW

Thanks for the link!  I'll have to compare them to what I wrote.  For my rounded
box I basically constructed it from boxes, cylinders, and spheres for which I
had exact distance functions; this version is much more elegant.

-- Chris R.

Post a reply to this message

"Chris R" <car### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
> "Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> > "Chris R" <car### [at] comcastnet> wrote:
> >
> > > One of the things that really helps with this is having a version of
> > > f_rounded_box that more accurately returns the distance of a point from the
> > > surface of the box.  That allows me to simply add/subtract other pigment
> > > functions with a depth I can model to the shape function in the isosurface.
> > > It's much slower than the built-in f_rounded_box, but gives more controllable
> > > results.
> >
> > Interesting.
> > What equation are you using?
> >
> > I'm wondering if you might benefit from this:
> >
> > https://iquilezles.org/articles/distfunctions/
> >
> > - BW
>
> Thanks for the link!  I'll have to compare them to what I wrote.  For my rounded
> box I basically constructed it from boxes, cylinders, and spheres for which I
> had exact distance functions; this version is much more elegant.
>
> -- Chris R.
I started with the rounded box function in the article and compared it to my
implementation, both just a straight box, and with noise added for a bumpy
surface.

First note:  The images are identical in both cases, so both functions are
computing the same thing.

Second note:  my version is 10X slower than Quilez version!

So, I will be replacing my version with the Quilez version in my code library,
and updating the library with all of the shapes from the article over time.

There is a little work in the porting, because POV-Ray functions don't take
vector arguments, so you have to unroll all of the vectors as x,y,z parameters,
but otherwise it was pretty simple.

Thanks again for the pointer!  I'm looking forward to faster renders...

-- Chris R

Post a reply to this message