The turbulence adds a lot of detail to the media, so in a way it is 
producing the noise. More samples will remove it (around 200 using method 
3). Using interpolate 1 also seems to reduce artifacts significantly. I have 
the files now to render a 4 second simulation but it might take awhile. 
Uncompressed it is going to be about 5GB of data!

Mike


"triple_r" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message 
news:web.495937fd5c21e16bf02256cf0@news.povray.org...
> "Mike Hough" <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> My first decent image using the wavelet turbulence code for fluid
>> simulation. The default settings turned out to me none to interesting, so 
>> I
>> have been playing around with random source generation and am getting 
>> some
>> better results. I am going to run a simulation at higher resolution and
>> hopefully have a decent animation in a day or two.
>
> Neat.  Haven't gotten a chance to play with the code yet, but it's a novel 
> idea.
> Is the noise in the media from the Monte-Carlo sampling, or from the 
> synthetic
> turbulence?  If the former, then maybe media method 3 would work better. 
> With
> the simulations I've run before, it seems like it can take longer to 
> render it
> well than it does to calculate it in the first place, but I guess it's 
> been a
> few years since I last tried.  Thanks for the good link, and I'm 
> interested to
> see the results of the animation.
>
> - Ricky
>
>

Post a reply to this message