|
|
On 22-6-2017 13:50, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>
>> This is a nice try but... it is not a /stacking/ of stones. It is a
>> crackled volume. If you drop stones, they will behave differently from
>> what you see here.
>
> Indeed - it wasn't really even supposed to be a "try" - it was just a blatant
> cut&paste with a minor tweak or two to get it to run and close up the gaps a bit
> - to show that with a wee bit of POV-Ray magic, a 3-dimensional Voronoi diagram
> that gives the appearance of a pile of "stones" is THAT quick and easy - no
> math, no (user-written) algorithms, no staying up late, pulling out one's
> (remaining) hair, no crying in the corner because you're stoopid.
>
> And to pick nits, if you drop stones, they will of course [sic] behave
> differently than if you stack them.
>
> AND the end result is going to be a product of however the user codes the scene
> anyway, will will be a further layer of deviation from reality.
>
> I'd say we're at a juncture where the parameters of the project need to be
> defined. But there still all sorts of fun variations on the theme that we can
> play with - unconstrained by the prof. :)
> (which is what the _really_ good students ought to be doing along the way / in
> addition to the stated project)
>
> "So, I made that rock pile that you wanted - but I also did a few old Scottish
> castles, the Great Wall of China, a cross-section of an archaeological
> excavation site with some fossil meshes thrown in, an animated exploding Rice
> Krispy treat, the rubble in the aftermath of a Kalifornia earthquake, and I've
> begun a study on the kinetics of settling in a mixture of sand, aggregate, and
> cement in pre-mixed concrete....... by the way is there any more coffee?"
> ;)
>
>
I can only agree with you :-)
To tell the truth, I was not criticising your crackle which is fine by
itself and useful in other contexts (a mortared wall?) I wanted to draw
attention (mine included) to the very different geometry presented by
stacking stones. Obvious, and yet something to ponder deeply for
modelling purposes. :-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|