"Ian Burgmyer" wrote:
> "Rune" wrote:
> > However, if the camera angle had been different
> > you'd have been able to see that hundreds of the
> > particles fall through the surface - which is not
> > good. Something I'll have to work on...
>
> Well, let's just say...it's a really...REALLY good start :-)

Hehe :)

> I like how the particles sort of "spill" over the edge.
> That looks very cool.

No special programming there - just a result of randomness...

> My only complaint is that the water looks a little blobby,
> but Tony probably would have killed you if there were
> millions of blobs in there :-)

He decided himself how many particles to use. He raised it from 10 particles
per clock unit (which I had used in my tests) to 100 particles per clock
unit.

BTW, the animation is 20 clock units long.

Using even more particles would probably look better, but also be incredible
slow. I am thinking of possible alternatives...

> How long did it take you to do this?

TonyB said it took about a day to render. But if you're talking about
creation time it's more difficult to say. The particle system is an ongoing
project for me that I've been working on for months. This animation in
particular took a few days which was mainly used to create the heightfield
and do test renders of the simulation.

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 10)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message