|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"omniverse" <omn### [at] charternet> wrote:
> Looks good! Sure helps add fluidity having movement... hey, a thought... which
> you seemed to be hinting at already. Camera view moving around from wall to wall
> would give it less slideshow feel too.
>
>
> Bob
I really like the camera movement.
https://youtu.be/a6MPNCVGZm8
Ken
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 2/12/2017 7:39 PM, omniverse wrote:
> > Looks good! Sure helps add fluidity having movement... hey, a thought...
>
> And a slight movement in the sky would help with a sense of "time going by".
>
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
I have been considering the sky movement from the very start, but I am not going
to work on that until the shed is complete. Complete build slab to siding to
roof, in one day, (one day in the animation that is).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Klewlis" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
Anyone know why this works:
camera {
location <-240, 100, 118>
//direction <0, 0, 3.0>
//right x*1.33
look_at <0, 50, 118>
//experimental
#if (frame_number>5)
rotate x*(frame_number*10)
#end
//#end experimental
}
But this doesn't:
camera {
location <-240, 100, 118>
//direction <0, 0, 3.0>
//right x*1.33
look_at <0, 50, 118>
//experimental
#while (frame_number<11)
rotate x*(frame_number*10)
#end
//#end experimental
}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 13.02.2017 um 17:38 schrieb Klewlis:
> I really like the camera movement.
>
> https://youtu.be/a6MPNCVGZm8
Absolutely.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/13/2017 2:19 PM, dick balaska wrote:
> Am 2017-02-13 08:18, also sprach Stephen:
>> On 2/13/2017 12:35 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> Nah! in the UK it is always drizzling... :-)
>>
>>
>> You should know. The Netherlands often gets our leftover weather. ;-)
>>
>
> Netherlands second!
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELD2AwFN9Nc
>
>
Very good :-)
And you were second. The second country to throw the founding fathers
out after England* did.
* My lot (Scotland) kept them bottled them up until they became Rednecks
before sending them to Texas and similar states.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 13.02.2017 um 17:46 schrieb Klewlis:
> "Klewlis" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> Anyone know why this works:
>
> camera {
> location <-240, 100, 118>
> //direction <0, 0, 3.0>
> //right x*1.33
> look_at <0, 50, 118>
> //experimental
> #if (frame_number>5)
> rotate x*(frame_number*10)
> #end
> //#end experimental
> }
>
> But this doesn't:
>
> camera {
> location <-240, 100, 118>
> //direction <0, 0, 3.0>
> //right x*1.33
> look_at <0, 50, 118>
> //experimental
> #while (frame_number<11)
> rotate x*(frame_number*10)
> #end
> //#end experimental
> }
Because you can't loop over frames in your .pov file. POV-Ray already
does that loop for you, and re-parses the .pov file all over again for
each frame, with values like frame_number acting as some kind of
parameter. So in your .pov file you can test which frame is currently
being rendered, but you cannot actively loop over multiple frames.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Klewlis" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> using windows Movie Maker, because I can't afford to buy anything at this time.
I use VideoMach - seems to work well enough for what I want to do most of the
time.
One thing I've done for some step-wise animations is to set up my scene file in
a Switch-Range-Break block - the main animation clock drives the whole scene and
determines which range block gets rendered, and then each range section has a
sub-clock that does its own 0-1.
So 0 to 0.1 will be Clock1, which goes from Clock*10 = 0 to Clock*10 = 1
Then the next range block gets rendered from 0.11 to 0.2
(Clock-0.1)*10 = 0 to (Clock-0.1)*10 = 1
Just an idea - I honestly haven't played with Chris Colefax's ClockMod macros,
so I can't say if that's any easier / better.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 13.02.2017 um 17:46 schrieb Klewlis:
> > "Klewlis" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> >
> > #while (frame_number<11)
> > rotate x*(frame_number*10)
> > #end
>
> Because you can't loop over frames in your .pov file.
As clipka says... or to put it another way, the while loop doesn't terminate
unless given a finite number of iterations.
frame_number<11 is never reached, unless you began at 11.
Not sure what you're wanting to do, so this is only a guess:
#if(frame_number>5&frame_number<11)
rotate x*(frame_number*10)
#end
That confines the rotation to those number of frames.
Your current animation is more than I expected. I was thinking of the last
camera movement during the whole thing, although I realized it might not be
simple to implement if your wall raisings are only segmented parts put together.
BaldEagle's #switch #range suggestion is good to help with that.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 13.02.2017 um 17:46 schrieb Klewlis:
>
> Because you can't loop over frames in your .pov file. POV-Ray already
> does that loop for you, and re-parses the .pov file all over again for
> each frame, with values like frame_number acting as some kind of
> parameter. So in your .pov file you can test which frame is currently
> being rendered, but you cannot actively loop over multiple frames.
That should have been obvious to me, I know POV re-parses the entire scene with
each tick of the clock.
Thank you
Ken
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 2017-02-13 12:42, also sprach Bald Eagle:
> "Klewlis" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>> using windows Movie Maker, because I can't afford to buy anything at this time.
>
> I use VideoMach - seems to work well enough for what I want to do most of the
> time.
ffmpeg. It's great. It's the best encoder. Other encoders are losers! Sad!
> One thing I've done for some step-wise animations is to set up my scene file in
> a Switch-Range-Break block - the main animation clock drives the whole scene and
> determines which range block gets rendered, and then each range section has a
> sub-clock that does its own 0-1.
Yes! To me, this is the secret of animation. Everything gets broken down
to a movement of 0-1. Opening a door is 0-1 (0 degrees - 110 degrees)
and then scaled to fit the scene. So,
#declare FirstMoveStart = 0.0;
#declare FirstMoveEnd = 0.1;
#switch (clock)
#range (FirstMoveStart, FirstMoveEnd)
#declare I = AniSegment(FirstMoveStart, FirstMoveEnd);
...
#break
#end
#macro AniSegment(_start, _end)
((clock-_start)/(_end-_start))
#end
so I becomes 0-1 in that range block
Another helper is
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Move a Vector from, to, increment
#macro MoveV(_from, _to, __i)
<_from.x+((_to.x-_from.x)*__i),
_from.y+((_to.y-_from.y)*__i),
_from.z+((_to.z-_from.z)*__i)>
#end
And then, given a starting and end vector, I move between them.
#local V = MoveV(<0,0,0>, <1,1,1>, I)
And one more thing. :)
I always apply acceleration/deceleration to a move. So,
#declare I = AniSegment(FirstMoveStart, FirstMoveEnd);
#declare F = 0.5-(cos(I/2*pi2)/2);
(which is the top left curve here
http://www.buckosoft.com/~dick/pov/curves/ )
This gives a more natural feel to movement.
>
> So 0 to 0.1 will be Clock1, which goes from Clock*10 = 0 to Clock*10 = 1
> Then the next range block gets rendered from 0.11 to 0.2
> (Clock-0.1)*10 = 0 to (Clock-0.1)*10 = 1
>
> Just an idea - I honestly haven't played with Chris Colefax's ClockMod macros,
> so I can't say if that's any easier / better.
I played with them years ago and rejected them. Once you start with them
you're kind of tied in to that system and I needed more flexibility.
One other thing, I don't actually use clock directly. I use
#declare myclock = clock * SceneDurationInSeconds;
which gives me more natural timestamps for cues, and I can vary the
frame rate (number of frames in the scene) independently of the action.
--
dik
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|