Greetings,

Thank you all for your response - I did not quite expect that much
appreciation!

I'm going to take a bit of a liberty here and post a general reply
without following any particular threads. Hope this does not offend any
one. Here goes...

- The source, for those interested is posted in p.b.s-f

- Render times for a 512x384 frame was about 9.5 hrs (no AA) on a 90MHz
pentium w/ 24 megs of memory. I posted a reduced version because I did
not feel at the time that the larger file size was warranted.

- I'm still trying to render a larger 640x480 version, but its taking a
while. If anyone with more CPU time and speed would like to do one with
higher quality settings, feel free!

- Some of you mentioned that the color was a bit off towards the reddish
side (esp in the blue). I've noticed this too when I view my pics on
some other monitors, particularly with Macs.

  I'd also like to make a few general comments about this scene. While
it would be nice, to see it larger, this particular scene as it stands
has an effective size limit of about 640x480. Beyond that I would expect
the cloud details to become chunky, and the terrain texture too "plain"
(eg. no grass blades or rocks where one would start to expect to see
them). This is simply because I did not intend to render it at higher
resolutions. However, there are probably a few simple things that could
be adjusted to compensate, namely a higher octave value in the cloud
turbulence and/or increasing the camera angle for larger renders.
  Regarding the media, the sampling parameters are just borderline and
could be adjusted for better quality on the clouds, given that longer
render times are acceptable.

  Thank you again for your replies!

Abe

Post a reply to this message