 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Yes, better. It would be nice if it only emitted glows from the side
opposite to the direction of movement of the pot. Then it would look like
jets or spurts of magic dust. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I consider this perfect! Congrats Rune!
MJL
--
light_source{9*(y#macro A(H,B,R,T)prism{0,1H+4,0u*9,9v*9,0#local I=1;#while(I<H)
#local V=asc(substr(B,I,1))-33;<div(V,10)mod(V,10)>#local I=I+1;#end pigment{rgb
y}rotate-<90,R>translate-T}#end-z)rgb 9}A(14",6;MWmhryXN3,"60<15,0,8>)box{-99(x+
z)*99pigment{rgb 1}}fog{distance 11}camera{location(y-z)*25look_at 0}A(8"6hiAG=6
"-60x*-10)A(16"/.@VZno=<PLA89/"0x*5) // MJL
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think that things like glows and lens flares will look at their best if
they're done with some kind of post processing.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen Bell" wrote:
> Is there any way to have the movement of the lamp
> affect the movement of the particles?
I have support for movement but not for rotation, so I could get the
particles to be affected by the speed of the lamp, but I couldn't make them
spin when the lamp spins. However, I have chosen not to use it in this
animation, as I think it won't look very good. I can do a test though...
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tony[B]" wrote:
> Yes, better. It would be nice if it only emitted glows from
> the side opposite to the direction of movement of the pot.
> Then it would look like jets or spurts of magic dust. :)
But it's supposed to look like the whole lamp is emitting magic dust, not
just one side. However, when the lamp moves fast it automatically gets
almost the effect you describe...
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Mark James Lewin" wrote:
> I consider this perfect! Congrats Rune!
Thanks! :)
I'll probably do a few more tests, but I may not succeed in improving it
further.
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Apache" wrote:
> I think that things like glows and lens flares will look at
> their best if they're done with some kind of post processing.
Hmm, why?
I first had the glows much brighter, and the glows themselves looked better
that way, but it was very difficult to see the lamp itself for all the
glows, so I had to dim them.
Anyway, I don't see why the glows would look any better if post processed,
and it would be rather difficult to get as good antialiasing.
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'm back for weekend, so I'd thought I'd comment on
the animation as well...
I do agree with others, the motion of the lamp looks very good and
smooth. I also agree that discs and media don't look as nice as
glows do (though I personally never used glows, just saw them
in example-pics of MegaPOV and your animations).
How did you actually calculate the positions for the
particles? Did you use trace on the object (which I
suppose is how you did it)?
My system is very much capable of doing just such
an animation, because it doesn't seem like your
particles are bouncing off the walls or the lamp again...
I have used some spare hours these week during
my seminar to read through my printed version of my
particle-system, and I've found some stuff that will
be changed, some that will be added, and some that
will be removed, but I expect my system to be out
earlier than yours. Maybe you'd have a look at it then?
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tim Nikias" wrote:
> How did you actually calculate the positions for the
> particles? Did you use trace on the object (which I
> suppose is how you did it)?
Yes, I used trace on the object to find the initial position and direction
of movement for each particle. Do you also use trace in your system?
> My system is very much capable of doing just such
> an animation, because it doesn't seem like your
> particles are bouncing off the walls or the lamp again...
No, I think it would look unnatural if they bounced... :)
I could however make the particles glide out of the way of the lamp - I
think I'll try just that.
> I expect my system to be out earlier than yours.
> Maybe you'd have a look at it then?
If nothing more, I'll at least have a superficial look at the demo scenes
and documentation. Did you mean something else besides that?
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Yes, I used trace on the object to find the initial position and direction
> of movement for each particle. Do you also use trace in your system?
>
Nope. PartixGen was begun when Pov 3.1g was out, so
trace was no option. But my user-defined macros
allow the implementation of new Birth-Fields, so that
should be possible in case it was needed. Though I
do plan on putting a demo covering that part...
> ...
> No, I think it would look unnatural if they bounced... :)
>
For this animation, I agree. For actual flying sparks, that would
be natural. But we're talking magic here, eh? ;)
> I could however make the particles glide out of the way of the lamp - I
> think I'll try just that.
>
You mean like being pushed away? Collision detection, so-to-speak?
>
> If nothing more, I'll at least have a superficial look at the demo scenes
> and documentation. Did you mean something else besides that?
That's what I meant. Perhaps even trying a little...
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
