 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi,
hopefully about now there's an image in p.b.i - looks OK from here pity
the *^&king newsreader decided it had to be header then file...- same
subject line as this article.
(yeah, thanks I know it needs work :-) It's as much to teach myself as it
is to try and get something worth looking at. Gotta fix the water, add some
interest to the slopes...add a general atmosphere, get a better equation
for the mountains.... it's darker on the PC because I haven't set gamma for
you guys...).
Anyway, the scene is made from a mesh using math.inc (equation prototyped
in the "Graphing Calculator" included with MacOS). What I want to be able
to do is put a thin layer of cloud at about the same height as the mountain
peaks (media in the intesection of 2 planes - yes? Some peaks showing
through) but I'd like the clouds to cling near the mountain tops and leave
the space over the valleys mainly empty (I'll add a separate media to cover
those areas)...
Since I can generate a pattern based on the original equation, can I
somehow use that to define a density function for media?
(i.e. if there's mountain at this height (3/4 of the way up), use the
pattern at this other height (1/2 to 2/3) to define the approximate shape
of the cloud at the peak height (8/9 height)).
[if the math is reasonably complex (sorry) don't go into extreme detail,
just point me at what I need to read up on]
TIA for any thoughts/comments
Have Fun
Martin
--
Owner/Operator - Tesseract Computing
<hypercube 'at' tesseract.com.au> or just reply.
Computer Systems Officer - Tourism Tasmania
<Martin.Crisp 'at' tourism.tas.gov.au>
I speak for me.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
You might want to look at the Smellenbergh compile of POV-Ray, it
includes an older version of the isosurface patch which will allow you
to make the landscape directly from the equation(instead of using a
height field) and will also let you use the equation as a density
pattern(or any other pattern). Here is the URL:
http://users.skynet.be/smellenbergh/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Martin Crisp wrote:
>
I don't know if this works, but it's worth a try:
you mention intersection two plains, did you try intersection the heightfield
with its negative? If you translate the negative up a bit I think what is left
is a cut out of the peaks. Translate this up a little bit to make it stick out
of the original heightfield and do some funny stuff with media.
What I would probably do is whack a blob on each peak (you already have the math
for that).
Good luck,
Remco
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 19 Jul 1999 10:14 PM, Chris Huff <mailto:Chr### [at] compuserve com>
wrote:
>You might want to look at the Smellenbergh compile of POV-Ray, it
>includes an older version of the isosurface patch which will allow you
>to make the landscape directly from the equation(instead of using a
>height field) and will also let you use the equation as a density
>pattern(or any other pattern). Here is the URL:
>http://users.skynet.be/smellenbergh/
Thanks Chris I'll have a look (although I'd like to keep it in the official
version if I can...)
Have Fun
Martin
--
Owner/Operator - Tesseract Computing
<hypercube 'at' tesseract.com.au> or just reply.
Computer Systems Officer - Tourism Tasmania
<Martin.Crisp 'at' tourism.tas.gov.au>
I speak for me.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 19 Jul 1999 10:30 PM, Remco de Korte <mailto:rem### [at] xs4allnl>
wrote:
>Martin Crisp wrote:
>>
>I don't know if this works, but it's worth a try:
>you mention intersection two plains, did you try intersection the
heightfield
>with its negative? If you translate the negative up a bit I think what is
left
>is a cut out of the peaks. Translate this up a little bit to make it stick
out
>of the original heightfield and do some funny stuff with media.
No. In fact if I'd thought about it a bit more, the intersection between
two planes and the existing mesh is (almost) exactly what I need (DOH!!).
(Reading the manual isn't the problem, thinking laterally enough is...).
>What I would probably do is whack a blob on each peak (you already have
the
>math
>for that).
Only indirectly... (visions of finding local maxima above a threshold value
<shudder>)
>Good luck,
Luck is not a factor :-)
Thanks
Have Fun
Martin
--
Owner/Operator - Tesseract Computing
<hypercube 'at' tesseract.com.au> or just reply.
Computer Systems Officer - Tourism Tasmania
<Martin.Crisp 'at' tourism.tas.gov.au>
I speak for me.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
