"KalleK" <kal### [at] gmxde> wrote in message news:3c4927ca$1@news.povray.org...
> > What do you think of this new stiffness? Maybe something intermediate
would
> > be much better, I think.
>
> I think it looks better now it's is not melting anymore but, but it should
> have at least some wrinkles in the end of the animation.
> Maybe another object - a little sphere/box, which rests under the cloth.
The
> cloth shouldn't be flat as a plane in the end, IMHO.
>
> cukk

Yes, as you said, the melting is gone, but it looks like an invisible iron
is desperately flattening the cloth!

I already fixed this, I think, because the last run looked very good...
however I mistakingly didn't make enough frames, so I didn't want to post
it. Now, I'm trying a bit more complex algorithm, but I f****d the code and
can't see where is the bug... argghhh...

But I'll post soon my latest results.

Thanks for your comments,

Fernando.

Post a reply to this message

"Rick [Kitty5]" <ric### [at] kitty5com> wrote in message
news:3c4953e1$1@news.povray.org...
> > I tried to simulate a stiffer cloth, but I believe this time it may have
> > been too stiff! I think everything goes well until the final frames, in
> > which the cloth sort of "springs" quickly, seemingly in order to extend
> the
> > cloth as flat as possible and tries to go under the sphere... which
> > obviously does not happen with ordinary cloths!
> >
> > What do you think of this new stiffness? Maybe something intermediate
> would
> > be much better, I think.
>
> I think something closer to the wrinkly cloth would be better - this like
a
> sheet of rubber, while the other looked quite realistic IMO

Yes, I agree. I would also choose the other one. However I believe an
intermediate level of wrinkliness would look more natural. I'm working hard
in an alternate approach to the simulation and I'll post the results as soon
as they look good :)

Thanks for your comments,

Fernando.

Post a reply to this message

"Tony B" <ton### [at] sentienchomechoicecoyuk> wrote in message
news:3c49557b@news.povray.org...

> news:3c492407@news.povray.org...
> > I tried to simulate a stiffer cloth, but I believe this time it may have
> > been too stiff! I think everything goes well until the final frames, in
> > which the cloth sort of "springs" quickly, seemingly in order to extend
> the
> > cloth as flat as possible and tries to go under the sphere... which
> > obviously does not happen with ordinary cloths!
>
> I like the 'spring'. I was going to comment on the previous version
because
> it looked like there was too much friction between the sphere and the
cloth
> as the cloth finally falls to the 'ground'
>
> Brilliant!!
>
> T

Thanks Tony! I also believe the other one looked like it had a lot of
friction. As I recall having posted in another reply, I think this is caused
because the sphere was "pushing" the cloth outwards, without really changing
the internal forces, and that's why it looked like it didn't want to fall
down. Now I've changed this, but I haven't been really able to see if it
fixed this particular phenomenon.

Thanks for your comments!

Fernando.

Post a reply to this message

"Tony[B]" <ben### [at] catholicorg> wrote in message
news:3c49a6a8@news.povray.org...
> It's getting better. Keep trying. You'll find the right mix of parameters
> eventually. :)

I hope so! The problem is that I've now messed up the code while trying to
add new features, so I really have a double problem: fix the current code
and then search for the right mix of parameters!!!

Thanks for your comments,

Fernando.

Post a reply to this message

"Tom Bates" <tho### [at] shawca> wrote in message
news:3c49d029$1@news.povray.org...
> I would have expected it to fold over on itself and stay folded (but not
> tightly) in its resting position.
>
> I laid down a face-cloth and folded over the corner to visualize what I
was
> thinking.

Hi Tom. I agree with you: it is an unnatural movement. I think it was caused
because I gave too much emphasis to the stiffness of the cloth. I'm now
experimenting with new settings to see if this gets fixed.

Thanks for your suggestions!

Fernando.

Post a reply to this message

"Slime" <noo### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:3c49d8bb$1@news.povray.org...
> It looks like it's afraid to fall onto itself, like it's repelling itself
or
> something.

Hi Slime,

Yes, it looks like it wants to flatten itself out. You can see a very strong
repulsion against folding.

Thanks for your comments,

Fernando.

Post a reply to this message

news:3c49ead2@news.povray.org...
> > Well... I must get some sleep because tomorrow I have to wake up early.
> But
> > I'll be very happy to receive your comments and suggestions,
>
> *g* I know this problem ;-)
>
> It looks like the cloth gets "sucked" rather than "blown" underneath the
> sphere.
> Does your simulation take care abouth the thinckness of the cloth? It
looks
> like it is infintively thin?
> regards
> SY



Yes, the cloth is modeled as a triangular mesh, so topologically is a
surface of two dimensions, that's why it appears to have no thickness.

I spent some time trying to see how could I simulate some thickness in it...
at lease visually, but I didn't get anywhere.

You are from Austria? One year and a half ago I visited Salzburg and 6
months ago I visited Graz and Wien (Vienna) and I loved Austria! It is a
beautiful place.



Fernando.

Post a reply to this message

It seems that my newsreader has placed my replies in the wrong places... I'm
sorry for any inconvenience this may cause...

Sorry...

Fernando.

Post a reply to this message

Ooopss... I restarted it, and it seems that it was a temporary problem
because they are now where they belong.

Sorry for the false alarm... :/

Fernando


news:3c49fcae@news.povray.org...
> It seems that my newsreader has placed my replies in the wrong places...
I'm
> sorry for any inconvenience this may cause...
>
> Sorry...
>
> Fernando.
>

Post a reply to this message

news:3c49fcae@news.povray.org...
> It seems that my newsreader has placed my replies in the wrong places...
I'm
> sorry for any inconvenience this may cause...
>
> Sorry...
>
> Fernando.
>

I know you've complained about that before, but
they seem correct to me (reading with MS-OE5).

Tom Bates

#macro T(B)#local m=mod(B,8);#local B=floor(B/8);m#end#local
C=126981491245202;
#local D=115694168992822;sphere_sweep{b_spline 16#local
i=0;#while(i<16)<T(C)-4
,T(D)-4,10-i/10>.1#local i=i+1;#end pigment{rgb
1}}light_source{-10,1}//T.Bates

Post a reply to this message