Derived from the SCC WIP I posted in p.b.i a while ago, though obviously
this version uses a lot more than 256 bytes of code.

The animation is just a vturbulence function applied to the tops of the
grass blades (cones), with the turbulence moved over time.

-- 
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'grassy.m1v.mpg' (658 KB)

Less compressed version here (about 1.6MB):
http://evilsuperbrain.com/gallery/wip/index.php?movie=grassy_hq

-- 
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com

"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote in message 
news:4531f967@news.povray.org...
> Derived from the SCC WIP I posted in p.b.i a while ago, though obviously
> this version uses a lot more than 256 bytes of code.
>
> The animation is just a vturbulence function applied to the tops of the
> grass blades (cones), with the turbulence moved over time.
>
> -- 
> Tek
> http://evilsuperbrain.com
>
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote in message 
news:4531f967@news.povray.org...

   Nice one! Although, that is a very *strong* wind.

    ~Steve~


> Tek
> http://evilsuperbrain.com
>
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

That's awesome!

Was the rendering time ok?
(Considering you said something about using cones.)

Should be neat flying past an animated field blowing in the wind like that.
:)

Post a reply to this message

Rendering time wasn't great 'cause I need high anti-alias settings and the 
scene takes a few seconds to parse, so it took about 7 hours for 200 frames. 
Not ideal but certainly useable.

The problem with flying past is that the area is relatively small, what 
looks like the crest of a hill is actually the limits of the grassy area 
I've created, so when I rigged up a version that would move that area with 
the camera (so we never get closer to the far edge as we fly through the 
field) you can really badly see ground popping in at that distance. To hide 
this effect I'd need many times more grass, which would make it render many 
times slower... sigh...

-- 
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com

"RusHHouR" <gee### [at] mailnu> wrote in message 
news:web.4534eae6ab8d2f9647d3ae5e0@news.povray.org...
> That's awesome!
>
> Was the rendering time ok?
> (Considering you said something about using cones.)
>
> Should be neat flying past an animated field blowing in the wind like 
> that.
> :)
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
> Rendering time wasn't great 'cause I need high anti-alias settings and the
> scene takes a few seconds to parse, so it took about 7 hours for 200 frames.
> Not ideal but certainly useable.
>
> The problem with flying past is that the area is relatively small, what
> looks like the crest of a hill is actually the limits of the grassy area
> I've created, so when I rigged up a version that would move that area with
> the camera (so we never get closer to the far edge as we fly through the
> field) you can really badly see ground popping in at that distance. To hide
> this effect I'd need many times more grass, which would make it render many
> times slower... sigh...
>
> --
> Tek
> http://evilsuperbrain.com

Ah, I see.. :/
How many grass cones/units are there then in this version?

Post a reply to this message

"RusHHouR" <gee### [at] mailnu> wrote in message 
news:web.453677b1ab8d2f9647d3ae5e0@news.povray.org...
> How many grass cones/units are there then in this version?

it's a 128x128 grid, so 16,384.

-- 
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com

Post a reply to this message

Tek nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 17/10/2006 11:56:
> Rendering time wasn't great 'cause I need high anti-alias settings and the 
> scene takes a few seconds to parse, so it took about 7 hours for 200 frames. 
> Not ideal but certainly useable.

> The problem with flying past is that the area is relatively small, what 
> looks like the crest of a hill is actually the limits of the grassy area 
> I've created, so when I rigged up a version that would move that area with 
> the camera (so we never get closer to the far edge as we fly through the 
> field) you can really badly see ground popping in at that distance. To hide 
> this effect I'd need many times more grass, which would make it render many 
> times slower... sigh...

Maybe you can hide that with some fog. Another avenue would be to make the 
ground much larger and use some faked grass outside the area actualy covered by 
your grass.

-- 
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
Impressionism: From a distance, shit looks like a garden.

Post a reply to this message

I think fake grass would be the best option, otherwise I'd need fog so dense 
you could only see a distance of 128 blades of grass, which in real world 
terms would be maybe a couple of meters, now that's foggy! :)

-- 
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com

"Alain" <ele### [at] netscapenet> wrote in message 
news:4536cc6d$1@news.povray.org...
> Tek nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 17/10/2006 11:56:
>> Rendering time wasn't great 'cause I need high anti-alias settings and 
>> the scene takes a few seconds to parse, so it took about 7 hours for 200 
>> frames. Not ideal but certainly useable.
>
>> The problem with flying past is that the area is relatively small, what 
>> looks like the crest of a hill is actually the limits of the grassy area 
>> I've created, so when I rigged up a version that would move that area 
>> with the camera (so we never get closer to the far edge as we fly through 
>> the field) you can really badly see ground popping in at that distance. 
>> To hide this effect I'd need many times more grass, which would make it 
>> render many times slower... sigh...
>
> Maybe you can hide that with some fog. Another avenue would be to make the 
> ground much larger and use some faked grass outside the area actualy 
> covered by your grass.
>
> -- 
> Alain
> -------------------------------------------------
> Impressionism: From a distance, shit looks like a garden.

Post a reply to this message

What about spreading the grass out just a little with fake grass in between? 
Or thin it out towards the edges, fading to dirt/gravel/whatever was you 
leave the grassy area? Like a small grassy areas forgotten & idle in the 
middle of suburbia? Or those creek areas we all used to play in as kids ;)

"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote in message 
news:45375c50@news.povray.org...
>I think fake grass would be the best option, otherwise I'd need fog so 
>dense you could only see a distance of 128 blades of grass, which in real 
>world terms would be maybe a couple of meters, now that's foggy! :)
>
> -- 
> Tek
> http://evilsuperbrain.com
>
> "Alain" <ele### [at] netscapenet> wrote in message 
> news:4536cc6d$1@news.povray.org...
>> Tek nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 17/10/2006 11:56:
>>> Rendering time wasn't great 'cause I need high anti-alias settings and 
>>> the scene takes a few seconds to parse, so it took about 7 hours for 200 
>>> frames. Not ideal but certainly useable.
>>
>>> The problem with flying past is that the area is relatively small, what 
>>> looks like the crest of a hill is actually the limits of the grassy area 
>>> I've created, so when I rigged up a version that would move that area 
>>> with the camera (so we never get closer to the far edge as we fly 
>>> through the field) you can really badly see ground popping in at that 
>>> distance. To hide this effect I'd need many times more grass, which 
>>> would make it render many times slower... sigh...
>>
>> Maybe you can hide that with some fog. Another avenue would be to make 
>> the ground much larger and use some faked grass outside the area actualy 
>> covered by your grass.
>>
>> -- 
>> Alain
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> Impressionism: From a distance, shit looks like a garden.
>
>

Post a reply to this message