Looks good, and I bet the emitting media rendered alot faster than scattering smoke.

MJL

--
prism{0,.1,30#local I=1;#while(I<30)#local B=asc(substr(// Mark James Lewin
"#K?U_u`V[RG>3<9DGPL.0EObkcPF'",I,1))-33;<div(B,10)-4mod(B,10)+5*div(I,21)-
6>#local I=I+1;#end,-4pigment{rgb 9}rotate-x*90translate 15*z}//POV-Ray 3.5

Post a reply to this message

> Looks good, and I bet the emitting media rendered alot faster than scattering smoke.
>

Thanks. Yes, it did significantly (25secs in comparison to 1 min or so).

--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html

Post a reply to this message

> Neat! I actually kind of like the individual particles instead of a cloud-
> makes it look like some kind of magic ;)

There is no magic involved, only POV-Ray SDL and over
a year in algorithmic trial/error + logic thinking...

--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html

Post a reply to this message

Thanks.


> looks very sweet :)
>

--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html

Post a reply to this message

"Tim Nikias" wrote:
> Here's my newest test-animation.

That's a nice effect!

However, I'm not sure what the purpose of the metal tube is. Is it supposed
to be a real object or just a visualizasion of the path that the white glow
is taking? Is it the tube that's the emitter or is it the white glow? If the
tube is the emitter, then what is the white glow, and if the white glow is
the emitter, then what is the tube? Maybe you could take basis in some
example from real life.

If the white glow is the emitter, then there might be a flaw in the inertia
design of the particles, because then inertia should have effect for all
movements of the white glow, not just the global rotation.

I'm not sure I exaplin very well what I mean, but it would be easier if you
took basis in some situation from real life.

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated Feb 16)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

>
> That's a nice effect!
>

Thanks!

>
> However, I'm not sure what the purpose of the metal tube is. Is it supposed
> to be a real object or just a visualizasion of the path that the white glow
> is taking? Is it the tube that's the emitter or is it the white glow? If the
> tube is the emitter, then what is the white glow, and if the white glow is
> the emitter, then what is the tube? Maybe you could take basis in some
> example from real life.
>

Well, okay. The white glow emits the particles.
The glow moves along the silver tube, which is there
for visualization. The camera rotates around the scene to
show more clearly how the particles fly.


>
> If the white glow is the emitter, then there might be a flaw in the inertia
> design of the particles, because then inertia should have effect for all
> movements of the white glow, not just the global rotation.
>

I don't know if I understand these sentences. What the
system did was to calculate in which direction the
centrifugal-force would go, given a large enough speed.
This direction is in no means proportional to any actual
speed (yet), but just normalized and used for the
particles to fly somewhere.

>
> I'm not sure I exaplin very well what I mean, but it would be easier if you
> took basis in some situation from real life.
>

Take a glass of water, drive a car, open the window, and hold
the glass outside. When driving through a curve, the water
might drift off outwards.
Sadly, glasses of water aren't easily created with particles.
But for the Release I'll come up with a better example,
I promise! ;-)

--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html

Post a reply to this message

"Tim Nikias" wrote:
> Well, okay. The white glow emits the particles.
> The glow moves along the silver tube, which is there
> for visualization.

Ah, that's what I thought.

> I don't know if I understand these sentences.
> What the system did was to calculate in which
> direction the centrifugal-force would go, given
> a large enough speed.

But a centrifugal force is just the force of inertia.

> Take a glass of water, drive a car, open the window,
> and hold the glass outside. When driving through a
> curve, the water might drift off outwards.

Exactly, because of inertia. First the car drives North. When it turns and
drives East, the water still moves in the North direction, which is now
outwards from the perpective of the car. It looks like the water moves
outwards, but it actually just moves in the same direction it did all the
time.

My point is that all movements of the emitter should affect interia, not
just the overall rotation of the metal tube.

In your animation it's like the whole metal tube is the car, so the rotation
of the metal tube causes a centrifugal force. However, it is really not the
tube that's the car, it is only the white glow that is the car, and the tube
is like the road that the car is driving on (ok, a rotating road, but
still.) Every turn the white glow takes on the spline should have a
centrifugal force, not just the overall rotation of the metal tube.

Is it more clear now what I mean?

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated Feb 16)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

I think I know what you're going for. You mean,
instead of taking the path the emitter takes,
I should...
Hm, what actually? Calculate the direction
its heading and move particles... Where?

I don't understand the algorithmic side of
this, so I don't really grasp what you're after.

I'm taking the path and calculate its possible
inertia, though not yet in proportion to the
actual speed, or curvature. Is it that what annoys
you, or just irritates you?

Tell me how you'd calculate that on a non I/O-System,
or how you do with I/O (I think, I first need to understand
what you actually mean, before I can implement it, eh? ;-)


Also, the tube doesn't rotate, its the camera around the
tube that's rotating. I'm about to make some adjustments
to the code, I'll post a new animation with still standing
camera then, okay? Perhaps that makes it all less
confusing.


--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html

Post a reply to this message

"Tim Nikias" wrote:
> Also, the tube doesn't rotate, its
> the camera around the tube that's
> rotating. I'm about to make some
> adjustments to the code, I'll post
> a new animation with still standing
> camera then, okay? Perhaps that makes
> it all less confusing.

Heh, I see now that I was indeed confused by the rotating camera. At closer
inspection your centrifugal force seem to work very nicely. Gee, what I've
been saying must have been a bit confusing then... ;)

> I'm taking the path and calculate its possible
> inertia, though not yet in proportion to the
> actual speed, or curvature. Is it that what
> annoys you, or just irritates you?

Never mind what I said before. However, it still might be possible to make
your system more accurate and maybe the code for it will even be simpler
too.

> Tell me how you'd calculate that on a non
> I/O-System, or how you do with I/O (I think,
> I first need to understand what you actually
> mean, before I can implement it, eh? ;-)

It's very simple. For particle X, find out the movement vector (direction
and speed) that the emitter has in the moment when particle X is born. Then
make particle X move in that direction and with some percentage of that
speed. Typically you will let the user make the particles inheret a certain
percentage of the movement of the emitter. This is how I would do it both
for an I/O and no-I/O system.

Maybe this is alrady how you're doing it - it's a bit difficult to tell from
the animation. I just heard you talk about vcross functions and the like in
povray.advanced-users, which seems not to be nesesary to calculate a
centrifugal force.

Anyway, keep up the good work!

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated Feb 16)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

>
> Heh, I see now that I was indeed confused by the rotating camera. At closer
> inspection your centrifugal force seem to work very nicely. Gee, what I've
> been saying must have been a bit confusing then... ;)
>

Yup. Good that we've cleaned up the mess by now... ;-)

>
> [...]
> Maybe this is alrady how you're doing it - it's a bit difficult to tell from
> the animation. I just heard you talk about vcross functions and the like in
> povray.advanced-users, which seems not to be nesesary to calculate a
> centrifugal force.
>

Well, I'm actually calculating the normal on the movement-path,
so that vcross-stuff is necessary. You're idea sounds interesting,
I've never thought of that. Should be pretty easy to implement...
Expect some animations concerned with inertia and the like
in a few days...

>
> Anyway, keep up the good work!
>
>

Thanks, I will.

--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html

Post a reply to this message