I don't think that would be ruled out, particularly since pov 0.7 had soft glow
and focal blur post production effects that were identical to what you'd do in a
paint program but those were allowed.

I think the idea of the rules is that your image is a representation of what can
be produced by your renderer, and since you aren't attempting to improve the
image in 2D by hand I don't think anyone would complain. I think even using a
paint program for this kind of thing might be considered okay, since povs
guidelines say you should only do something automated that you'd be prepared to
do on hundreds of frames of animation... but that's a whole different debate.

--
Tek
http://www.evilsuperbrain.com


"Tim Nikias v2.0" <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3eef7fa0@news.povray.org...
> Sounds fairly interesting. But you're right, I don't
> want to create and use techniques which can't be
> done with pure POVing. Since I think it is okay to
> reuse and image processed by POV-Ray, I'm
> thinking of ways to blur the image via POV-Ray before
> applying it as a transparent quad which will
> be positioned to cover the image area.
>
> The only problem is with focal blur. The only method I
> see for that is to render both images (specular and
> normal) with focal-blur, then blur the specular image
> and position both images as textured quads in front
> of the camera. Thats compositing via POV-Ray.
>
> So, all in all, it should be close enough to the non-post-
> processed, as you're working only with POV-Ray,
> and if that gets ruled out, I don't know how 3D-Studio
> Max's Lens flare (just as an example) gets allowed...
>
> --
> Tim Nikias v2.0
> Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights
> Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
>
> > It looks good, and is pretty simple to do.
> >
> > Incidentally, if you're interested, the way to get a more "real world"
> version
> > of this would be to render the scene much darker usign 48-bit colour so
> that
> > bright things don't just flatten out to white. Then process that to two
> > different images, using colour curves that simulate film colour response.
> One of
> > the images should be processed with a curve that picks out just the bright
> > things. Then you blur that image and add it to the first.
> >
> > The advantage with this technique is it will pick up on any bright thing,
> not
> > just specular highlights. Also if you replace the blur stage with a series
> of
> > more complex transformations you can emulate a very realistic lens flare
> effect.
> >
> > But personally I haven't played with those techniques because I don't want
> to
> > learn skills I can't use in the IRTC! Maybe one day I'll write all of this
> into
> > a povray patch...
> >
> > --
> > Tek
> > http://www.evilsuperbrain.com
> >
> > "Tim Nikias v2.0" <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
> > news:3eef46d8@news.povray.org...
> > > Here's a pic from the quick way:
> > > 1. Render image with only black background/textures,
> > > and only leave specular in finish...
> > > 2. Modify that image via Paint-Program of Choice
> > > 3. Layer the image back ontop of the scene, this
> > > time with everything but specular on.
> > >
> > > Works fine for antialiasing, doesn't work with
> > > focal blur (I'll create some workaround), and
> > > depending on complexity of scene takes just
> > > about 30 seconds...
> > >
> > > My macros could do it an hour...
> > > (What a waste of time...:-(
> > >
> > > Still looks nice as an effect though.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Tim Nikias v2.0
> > > Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights
> > > Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Post a reply to this message