Bob H. <omn### [at] msncom> wrote:

> Main reason for posting this Bryce-like ?ender is to say that this went very
> normally until the last 20 lines or so.  It took a couple hours (or less) to
> get to the part where the reflection of the nearby hillside shows up in the
> water.  From there it was doing one line every few minutes and steadily got
> slower.
> I do very little with reflection_blur but I suspect that could be why, the
> combination of it and isosurface.  No kidding, huh?
> Some 4 hours to finish for this size, was hoping to get a much larger one
> made quicker, once it's ready.  Not so sure now  :-)

Hmm, not certain why you're even bothering with an iso.  The distance and
wave size mean that a surface normal would probably be more than sufficient
for this image, even if blown up to a very large size.

Also, I wonder why you are using blurred reflection, since reflections on
water are pretty sharp.  If you want the blurring, then I'd think you'd want
rougher water, not blurred reflec.  So I guess I wonder why you're using
these features in this instance.

It's a very nice pic, all the same.

Geoff

Post a reply to this message