 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> OK I fixed it. The dark areas in the reflection are actually the sky, not
> the floor! So I put a white sky in there (instead of black) and it looks
> exactly right now. (the dark area in the reflection *is* the floor in the
> distance)
OK maybe not totally fixed. I got the lighter reflection bit ok, but now
the dark areas around the caustics inside the rings are not as black as the
original. I give up!
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'image1.jpg' (247 KB)
Preview of image 'image1.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott escreveu:
>> OK I fixed it. The dark areas in the reflection are actually the sky,
>> not the floor! So I put a white sky in there (instead of black) and
>> it looks exactly right now. (the dark area in the reflection *is* the
>> floor in the distance)
>
> OK maybe not totally fixed. I got the lighter reflection bit ok, but
> now the dark areas around the caustics inside the rings are not as black
> as the original. I give up!
LOL
good enough to me and I wonder about render time.
Yes, either it's too dark or too bright when playing with it. I also
tried lots of postprocessing options, to no good. Mentalray's
dielectric shader definetely has an edge here, though I wonder about its
physical plausibility since 2 physical-based renderers were put to try
to mimic it and could not. Still, real or not, it looks damn good... :)
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> did you drop the media inside the torii? Post the changes, man! if you
> feel like it, that is. It's not GPL'd... :D
Hmm interesting. If I make a GPL scene, and some modifies it and posts a
rendered image of it, does it count as a "binary" of the scene, making him
legally required to post corresponding source, or is it just the result of
running the program?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez escreveu:
> nemesis wrote:
>> did you drop the media inside the torii? Post the changes, man! if you
>> feel like it, that is. It's not GPL'd... :D
>
> Hmm interesting. If I make a GPL scene, and some modifies it and posts a
> rendered image of it, does it count as a "binary" of the scene, making him
> legally required to post corresponding source, or is it just the result of
> running the program?
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez escreveu:
>> nemesis wrote:
>>> did you drop the media inside the torii? Post the changes, man! if you
>>> feel like it, that is. It's not GPL'd... :D
>>
>> Hmm interesting. If I make a GPL scene, and some modifies it and posts a
>> rendered image of it, does it count as a "binary" of the scene, making
>> him legally required to post corresponding source, or is it just the
>> result of running the program?
>
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
How informative, as if I hadn't read it :)
A .pov is the source code, but is a rendered image "object code", or is it
just the program's output?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez escreveu:
> nemesis wrote:
>> Nicolas Alvarez escreveu:
>>> nemesis wrote:
>>>> did you drop the media inside the torii? Post the changes, man! if you
>>>> feel like it, that is. It's not GPL'd... :D
>>> Hmm interesting. If I make a GPL scene, and some modifies it and posts a
>>> rendered image of it, does it count as a "binary" of the scene, making
>>> him legally required to post corresponding source, or is it just the
>>> result of running the program?
>> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
>
> How informative, as if I hadn't read it :)
>
> A .pov is the source code, but is a rendered image "object code", or is it
> just the program's output?
(the final image, the Gimp, a book etc)
in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of an
exact copy.
the Program.
(my original image and another based on it are both covered works by the
license)
parties to make or receive copies.
work.
(the povray scene file. The resulting image would be "object code" in
this case: harder to modify, only with image manipulation software)
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> did you drop the media inside the torii? Post the changes, man! if you
>> feel like it, that is. It's not GPL'd... :D
>
> Hmm interesting. If I make a GPL scene, and some modifies it and posts a
> rendered image of it, does it count as a "binary" of the scene, making him
> legally required to post corresponding source, or is it just the result of
> running the program?
I'll just say I rewrote it myself from scratch :-P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott escreveu:
>>> did you drop the media inside the torii? Post the changes, man! if you
>>> feel like it, that is. It's not GPL'd... :D
>>
>> Hmm interesting. If I make a GPL scene, and some modifies it and posts a
>> rendered image of it, does it count as a "binary" of the scene, making
>> him
>> legally required to post corresponding source, or is it just the
>> result of
>> running the program?
>
> I'll just say I rewrote it myself from scratch :-P
it leads to some very philosophical discussions indeed. Like, my povray
scene emulates a Mental Ray scene. Can I even GPL it?
no, I'm not in the mood to think about the consequences... Darren? :)
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> no, I'm not in the mood to think about the consequences... Darren? :)
Me??
I'm much more interested in the economics of the GPL than the legalese.
That said, if you're intentionally copying a copyrighted image, you're
probably violating the copyright on the original image. Even if you see
someone's POV image and paint an oil-and-canvas painting of it, yes?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
> > no, I'm not in the mood to think about the consequences... Darren? :)
>
> Me??
see, he's quick! :)
> That said, if you're intentionally copying a copyrighted image, you're
> probably violating the copyright on the original image. Even if you see
> someone's POV image and paint an oil-and-canvas painting of it, yes?
oh well, it happens everytime. Pictures found on Google or elsewhere almost
always serve as reference pictures for study and all...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
