 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I fixed some more bugs in the physics, so I decided I'd give them a thorough
test. I left this one running overnight and today while I was at work, that's 17
hours, just to see how it ran with a much larger number of balls. It's pretty
convincing apart from a couple of balls getting pushed through the walls :)
Next I think I might have a go at varying the radius and weight of each ball.
--
Tek
http://www.evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'MOTION.MPG' (335 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
After about the 5th ball dropped (or so) a couple of balls seem to "slide"
to the left in midair before they hit the ground.
"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbrain com> wrote in message
news:3b17d60f@news.povray.org...
> I fixed some more bugs in the physics, so I decided I'd give them a
thorough
> test. I left this one running overnight and today while I was at work,
that's 17
> hours, just to see how it ran with a much larger number of balls. It's
pretty
> convincing apart from a couple of balls getting pushed through the walls
:)
>
> Next I think I might have a go at varying the radius and weight of each
ball.
>
> --
> Tek
> http://www.evilsuperbrain.com
>
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3b17e14e$1@news.povray.org>, Patrick Dugan says...
> After about the 5th ball dropped (or so) a couple of balls seem to "slide"
> to the left in midair before they hit the ground.
>
I looked at all the images in detail (the motion blur made that
difficult), but as far as I can see it is all OK, the 'slides' you see
were 2 balls falling and hitting each other in mid air - I think.
To me it is astonishing real: excellent!
--
Regards, Sander
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I looked at all the images in detail (the motion blur made that
> difficult), but as far as I can see it is all OK, the 'slides' you see
> were 2 balls falling and hitting each other in mid air - I think.
I hate to contradict you, but I think Patrick might be right. I have a slightly
dubious piece of maths that alters the effects of gravity after a collision
(well I /thought/ it worked). I guess those two balls are just created too close
together then they fall constantly colliding. I've now fixed it in a low-tech
way by making sure balls aren't created so close together ;)
> To me it is astonishing real: excellent!
Thanks :D
--
Tek
http://www.evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
watched it for about five minutes straight looping...
noticed balls would pick up energy sometimes almost as
if the floor were "sprung." sorta eat- also noticed
one ball in back right corner got "caught" somehow and
gained energy somehow until it winked out or stopped
cold- couldn't tell.
overall VERY neat simulation!
--
CG images, *obscure* home-brewed graphics utils, and
animation
http://www.users.qwest.net/~dearmad
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
wow - how about doing these higher res - (like double)
--
Rick
Kitty5 WebDesign - http://Kitty5.com
Hi-Impact database driven web site design & e-commerce
TEL : +44 (01625) 266358 - FAX : +44 (01625) 611913 - ICQ : 15776037
POV-Ray News & Resources - http://Povray.co.uk
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> watched it for about five minutes straight looping...
> noticed balls would pick up energy sometimes almost as
> if the floor were "sprung."
Hmm... I think that's just when there's a series of collisions (so whilst one
ball may gain loads of energy some others should lose it). Every
collision -should- lose a little energy. Still, I'll look for that.
> also noticed
> one ball in back right corner got "caught" somehow and
> gained energy somehow until it winked out or stopped
> cold- couldn't tell.
Yup, I spotted that one. it's fixed now :)
> overall VERY neat simulation!
Thank you!
--
Tek
http://www.evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> wow - how about doing these higher res - (like double)
I would do, but my computer's been having problems recently due to overheating
(one of the many fans broke). I don't fancy leaving it on for too long until
I've fixed it.
Besides, I'm still improving the simulation. I'll do a high-res one once I'm
finished, if I ever am ;)
--
Tek
http://www.evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3b180dd6@news.povray.org>, Tek says...
>
> I hate to contradict you, but I think Patrick might be right.
OK, I'll stop defending your work in future :)
--
Regards, Sander
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I changed my mind! Here's a bigger render, from a nicer camera angle.
Unfortunately the motion blur isn't quite high enough quality for this
resolution, but other than that I'm very happy with it :)
A change to the physics now means that the balls can escape through the open
side of the box, which means the render has less things to draw, so this 200
frame higher-res version took a /mere/ 6 hours!
--
Tek
http://www.evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'MOTION.MPG' (556 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
