Utterly spectacular. High praise. I can feel the cool air coming off the water
and hear the bugs and birds whirring.

The only two cents I could add is the observation that creeks and pools tend to
have lots of leaves and seeds, etc floating in them, and this detritus tends to
accumulate in the stiller areas near the banks. Lots of insects, too, of
course, although these might only show in a supr hi-res view.

You really know your stuff.

DZ


Norbert Kern wrote:

> hi all,
>
> I got many encouraging statements regarding my last posting, thanks a lot.
> Furthermore some of you mentioned too uniform textures, too bright or too
> dark areas and so on.
> Those critics were all right.
> Radiosity would be a solution, but is too slow (probably too many objects).
> All shadowed points with the same texture have the same brightness with

> look like real nature.
> The main problem is the sky, which illuminates shadowed parts in nature, but
> not in povray (same is true for other raytracers, I think).
> There is no such light definition in megapov or povray. But many lights
> distributed on the sky should do the same.
> The best uniform distribution of points on a sphere is like the 60 points on
> buckminsterfullerene (like a football (soccer in U.S.)).
> I took those coordinates, deleted the points below the ground (negative y
> values.) Then I reduced the 30 lights to the most relevant 11, because with
> 30 lights test renders were too slow.
> Render time is 6 times as high as with fill lights. but the result is much
> better.
> To speed the test render up, some plants were excluded.
>
> Comments?

Post a reply to this message