Orchid XP v3 nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 07/10/2006 11:16:
>>> Cube is a placeholder, yes.
>>
>> Spheres usually make better placeholders when tweaking materials IMO, 
>> the hard edges of the cube mean you don't see how it interacts with 
>> the light at all angles, making it very hard to tune effects like 
>> specular.
> 
> I guess so...
> 
>>> OK. I'm currently investigating Christoph's waver macro. Seems to
>>> produce big fractal-like waves. (I'd actually like the ripples to
>>> radiate from the stone block and follow its shape eventually...)
>>
>> Well if you want ripples radiating from the block why are you looking 
>> at a macro for fractal like waves?
> 
> Because it works by placing multiple concentric rings of ripples 
> semi-randomly. Now if I place the centers of those ripples to coincide 
> with the edges of the block, the ripples will follow its outline. (This, 
> apparently, is how the Real World(tm) works...)
> 
>>> My main problem seems to be getting a decent sky. :-S
>>
>> Nope I disagree, if you have a realistic water material from this 
>> angle it would be almost completely transparent, the reflection would 
>> only show up on the top edge of the ripples (see attached picture).
> 
> Mmm, OK. In that case, my water is going to be completely black...
> 
>> What's important is the fall-off of the reflection, which should be 
>> either reflection{.01,1 falloff 5} to fake it or reflection{0,1 
>> fresnel} if you have a realistic ior.
> 
> Is IOR=1.3 "realistic"?
It is, it's close to the real ior of water. Pure water ior is 4/3. Salt or sea 
water's ior is close to 1.4.
> 
>>> I wouldn't have thought assumed_gamma 1 would have *any* effect...
>>> surely that just means that each colour component is raised to the power
>>> of 1 before being output?
>>
>> Yeah that confused the hell out of me when I first encountered it.
> 
> Here's a random question: does LCD require gamma correction?
> 
>> Anyway I couldn't resist the urge to have a go at a similar scene 
>> myself, so here's a picture and the source is in p.b.s-f. Most 
>> importantly note that the reflection on the water is very subtle, 
>> without the ripples you'd hardly see the water surface at all.
> 
> 0__0
> 
> OMG... you created something 17,826% better than what I had in about 20 
> seconds!
Fade_power should be 1 to be physicaly correct. A value of 2 is perfect for a 
light source, double the distance and get 1/4 the lighting, not for fading 
trough some substance. Light absorbtion trough a substance is linearly 
proportional to the thicknessm, double the thickness and the effect double, it 
don't quadruple.
Any way, for water, fade_distance is relatively large.

-- 
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
No matter how good she looks, some other guy is sick and tired of putting up 
with her shit.
	Men's Room, Linda's Bar and Grill, Chapel Hill , NC

Post a reply to this message