"Cousin Ricky" <ric### [at] yahoocom> schreef in bericht 
news:web.4949f2a26655db1885de7b680@news.povray.org...
> "alphaQuad" <alp### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
>> Here's a Cousin Ricky norm and the one I did for the Lego pool.
>> not in that order
>>
>> #declare n_surface = normal {
>>          function { f_ridge (x, y, z, 0.1, 1.0, 7, 0.7, 0.7, 0) } 2
>> //   function { f_ridged_mf (x, y, z, 0.1, 3.0, 7, 0.7, 0.7, 2) } 2
>> }
>
> I got the 2nd function from Christoph Hormann's water tutorial.
>
> The "2" on the end is mine, though.  A plane with a surface normal is not
> realistic near the horizon.  I was spurred to investigate when the 
> real-life
> sea outside my car window looked nothing like my render.  An isosurface 
> (or
> height field) looked a lot more like the real thing.  The "2" was an 
> attempt to
> compensate for the difference without giving up the speed advantage of a 
> plane.
>

Hm. I am not entirely convinced, although your function looks better than 
Christoph's. I have some doubts about the use of f_ridge for ripples/waves 
anyway. I prefer (for the time being) my own method (see above) with wave 
and ripple patterns. Using judiciously the ripple origin, you can even make 
interference patterns with that. Anyway, in most cases, ripples look like... 
ripples and waves look like... waves in nature.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message