Andrew C on Mozilla nous apporta ses lumieres ainsi en ce 2004/05/09 
05:54... :

> Hi folks.
>
> This is supposed to be a an extreme closeup of a small gemstone (a few 
> mm across), set in a gold setting. But it looks nothing like that - 
> and I can't figure out why.
>
> The stone doesn't look remotely gem-like. Can't figure that out. It's 
> transparent, reflective, and reflective. What am I missing?
>
> The setting doesn't look like gold. I've fiddled with brilliance, 
> specular, roughness, reflection, and turned on metallic (as well as 
> conserve_energy). Still doesn't look remotely like metal. Why?
>
> Also can't figure out why the metal setting apparently isn't resulting 
> in any photons. (It makes the photon process hundreds of times slower 
> - that is, I had to multiply the photon spacing a few hundred times to 
> get it to render this year.)
>
> This was supposed to end up being a single link in a bracelet - but it 
> looks so rubbish I hadn't get that far yet.
>
> Any ideas?
> Andrew @ home.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
The IOR for your gem may be to low, ruby's ior is higher than glass, 
close to 2 I think. Did you set the fade_distance and fade_power? Do you 
use media_atenuation? Sould be on. Now, it look like only the surfaces 
have any colour.
This look like a midle-ages kind of cut, no faceting on the under side, 
very box like (the had still to develop the needed skils and tools).
Did you set the metal as a target for the photons?
It may be "good enough" as is if it's going to be small in the final 
scene. How many links in your bracelet? How large will be the complete 
bracelet in your scene? You may do a trial render of the complete 
bracelet at the planed scale (no protons, no radiosity, no aa, only 1 or 
2 light).

Alain

Post a reply to this message