"Jan Walzer" wrote:
> ;) I was 'bout to tell you, that your grass
> doesn't work well, when animating ...

Well, if you had read the page I referred you to... ;)

> And in this case, of course, using media is no improvement ...
> But I _had_ a quite fast media version of grass ...

You posted one to povray.binaries.images at one time, which didn't include
camera or lights, so it was a bit difficult to know what it looked like at
your end.

> I'm sure a more advanced artist would have been able to
> color it in a way, to make it look more real ...
> (I'm not so good, when it comes, to make the textures
> look real) ...

That, unfortunately, would also make it slower.

The problem with using media for grass is that media is not made to simulate
solid objects. Emitting media becomes too bright at the horizon and
absorbing media becomes too dark. A combination would be better, but it
would still not be affected by light sources, so it would glow in the dark
and in shadows. To avoid that you'd need scattering media which is extremely
slow when dealing with a pattern as detailed as this one. I think, if you
managed to make media grass that's quite good looking, then it would
probably be slower than if you just used mesh objects for the grass. :/

Hmm, this thread originated as a discussion about clouds. Clouds are ideally
suited for media (or is it media that's ideally suited for clouds?). But I
just don't think that's the case with grass...

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated Feb 16)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message