On 8-7-2013 20:04, Samuel Benge wrote:
> I like the premise! My rock hammer's an Estwing, so you can bet I'd be sore if I
> lost it while out mineral hunting. The guy in your image could very well be me
> (except for the fact that I always double-or-triple-check my pack before moving
> on). The man in your image really should have a pack, BTW.

Great minds think alike ;-) My hammer is also an Estwing, and been with 
me for the last 50 years. Never lost it happily. It now gets a bit rusty 
in places... I am now modelling it for the scene; first a low detail 
version, but I intend to make a high resolution one later on for a 
projected close up of sorts. The least I can do for its faithful 
services :-)

Indeed, the guy could also be me in fact. The pack is a good idea. I 
shall work on that too.

> I agree with Paolo that there is something amiss with the boulder. To me it
> seems a bit out of place... but of course getting loose rocks to match the
> landscape has always been a problem, IME.

Yes, absolutely. I fact I had already decided to throw it out and 
replace it with something better integrated in the scene.

>
>> Render time about 5.5 hours. Not too bad.
>
> Could be much better, though. Are you using radiosity? If so, you can actually
> get away with a count of 1, provided your surfaces are sufficiently detailed.
> I'll try to post something to the TINA CHeP EOG thread later today to show you
> what I mean.

I am curious to see what you mean. I am indeed using radiosity. The 
isosurface max_gradient is pretty low, much lower than recommended by 
POV but giving the details I intend to get. With a lower count, I may 
need to increase the max_gradient though.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message