news:web.4121c35fe6dfd373e5987fa60@news.povray.org...
> and I make trace :
> http://destroyedlolo.homeunix.org:8080/~laurent/angle_30.jpg (with "angle
> 30")
> http://destroyedlolo.homeunix.org:8080/~laurent/sans_angle.jpg (without
> "angle")
>

It's certainly looking better and quite accurate. Too bad that the DEM
resolution is so low. I wonder if it would look better without the smoothing
in fact (the black outlines are artifacts). With some fog, and realistic
textures and sky, it could be pretty close to the real thing.
Note that with the default "direction 1*z", "without angle" is actually 67
degrees : direction_length = 0.5 * right_length / tan(angle / 2)
It's just that using angle instead of direction may give a more intuitive
control of the camera.

G.


-- 
**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

By the way, those renders are apparently suffering from the normal
inversion problem in POV-Ray. For more details and workarounds, see:
http://tag.povray.org/povQandT/SmoothTriangleArtifact/index.html

-- 
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}//  - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

Hi Gilles,

"Gilles Tran" <gitran_nospam_@wanadoo.fr> wrote:

> news:web.4121c35fe6dfd373e5987fa60@news.povray.org...
> > and I make trace :
> > http://destroyedlolo.homeunix.org:8080/~laurent/angle_30.jpg (with "angle
> > 30")
> > http://destroyedlolo.homeunix.org:8080/~laurent/sans_angle.jpg (without
> > "angle")
> >
>
> It's certainly looking better and quite accurate. Too bad that the DEM
> resolution is so low.

And I have also discover some "scanning noise" on some area (oblique lines
close to some mountains). Unfortunatly, it's the better sources I found
that is not too expensive (30 Euro for all France area in 75 meters
resolution). Otherwise, I have to by DEM data from french IGN institute it
cost more money and I have to pay for every area I need.

> I wonder if it would look better without the smoothing
> in fact (the black outlines are artifacts). With some fog, and realistic
> textures and sky, it could be pretty close to the real thing.

As you can see my script
http://destroyedlolo.homeunix.org:8080/~laurent/Lac_SlMap.pov is very
simple : my goal there was only to find if I can generate something
acceptable using POV and my DEM. Now, I will play w/ textures to improve
the result and, I hope, hide scanning noise.

Thanks and regards,

Laurent

Post a reply to this message