 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Inspired by the work of Justin Whitton I tried to create my own animated
electricity. It uses a bit more advanced techniques that allow better
control over the movement and flicker of the "beams" (any better word?).
In the simple attached animation the upper beam is "rolling" a lot and does
not flicker. The middle beam do not roll but it flickers a lot. The lower
beam do a little of each. Which one do you prefer?
Next task for me: Allow the beams to follow any path.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 10)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'electric.mpg' (251 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Since you asked I like the middle one. The other two give the impression of
a solid construct (something you would still see if the electricity was
turned off) but the middle one looks like pure electricity.
Just my ever-so-humble opinion of course :-)
"Rune" <run### [at] mobilixnet dk> wrote in message
news:3b34a4d5@news.povray.org...
> Inspired by the work of Justin Whitton I tried to create my own animated
> electricity. It uses a bit more advanced techniques that allow better
> control over the movement and flicker of the "beams" (any better word?).
>
> In the simple attached animation the upper beam is "rolling" a lot and
does
> not flicker. The middle beam do not roll but it flickers a lot. The lower
> beam do a little of each. Which one do you prefer?
>
> Next task for me: Allow the beams to follow any path.
>
> Rune
> --
> 3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
> Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 10)
> POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
> POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 23 Jun 2001 16:10:45 +0200, "Rune"
<run### [at] mobilixnetdk> wrote:
>Inspired by the work of Justin Whitton I tried to create my own animated
>electricity. It uses a bit more advanced techniques that allow better
>control over the movement and flicker of the "beams" (any better word?).
>
>In the simple attached animation the upper beam is "rolling" a lot and does
>not flicker. The middle beam do not roll but it flickers a lot. The lower
>beam do a little of each. Which one do you prefer?
I'll go along with "Spock" I prefer the middle one.
>Next task for me: Allow the beams to follow any path.
Surface of a sphere is easy :-) (it's in my source)
>Rune
Justin Whitton
_ __ __ _
\/ \ mail: jus### [at] rayjayclaracouk / \/
_/\__/ web: http://www.rayjay.clara.co.uk/ \__/\_
\/ \ MSN Messenger ID:msn### [at] rayjayclaracouk / \/
_/\__/ ICQ Messenger ID:100218081 \__/\_
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Justin Whitton" wrote:
> I'll go along with "Spock" I prefer the middle one.
I'm not sure which one I prefer, the middle or the lower. Maybe somewhere in
between. But definitely not the upper one.
> >Next task for me: Allow the beams to follow any path.
>
> Surface of a sphere is easy :-) (it's in my source)
Yes, but it also makes the beam sort of 2-dimensional. When it's viewed from
a certain angle it looks too perfect IMHO.
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 10)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
why does it look like there is vertical banding?
bottom beam btw - very cool
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Rick [Kitty5]" wrote:
> why does it look like there is vertical banding?
I don't know what you mean. Perhaps you're talking about .mpg artefacts?
> bottom beam btw - very cool
Thanks!
And I too prefer the bottom one!
Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 10)
POV-Ray Users: http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I like the lower one, makes me think of electricity in a gas like neon I
guess. The middle looks most like a electricity in open air to me though.
Maybe the upper one best fits what I think of as a plasma.
My knowledge on the subject is minimal, I only do my own wiring and such in
a sometimes haphazard way.
Bob H.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Middle one, but they all rock.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune <run### [at] mobilixnetdk> wrote:
> Inspired by the work of Justin Whitton I tried to create my own animated
> electricity. It uses a bit more advanced techniques that allow better
> control over the movement and flicker of the "beams" (any better word?).
> In the simple attached animation the upper beam is "rolling" a lot and does
> not flicker. The middle beam do not roll but it flickers a lot. The lower
> beam do a little of each. Which one do you prefer?
> Next task for me: Allow the beams to follow any path.
Hard to tell with the spin. A straight on shot might help, at least for me.
But I think the middle and bottom are definitely better. I'm thinking that
the bottom would work better with a bit of tweaking, but right now, the
middle is probably the best.
Geoff
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
