POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.binaries.animations : H.E.Days B8 station. Server Time
20 Jul 2024 15:25:24 EDT (-0400)
  H.E.Days B8 station. (Message 1 to 3 of 3)  
From: Fran Firman
Subject: H.E.Days B8 station.
Date: 17 Oct 2000 13:03:02
Message: <39EC5FA9.82C473E4@email.com>
Thought I would create a small anim, of a ship zooming past H.E.Day's b8
space-station, so see how the object would look.

Anyway here it is.

Took approx 1h (PII -400) + 3h (P-200) to render the 100 frames with
Megapov 0.5 for linux.

Cheers
Fran.


Post a reply to this message


Attachments:
Download 'b8.mpg' (243 KB)

From: Jamie Davison
Subject: Re: H.E.Days B8 station.
Date: 17 Oct 2000 14:56:35
Message: <MPG.1456a86f6fba29b298980e@news.povray.org>
On Tue, 17 Oct 2000 14:18:17 +0000, Fran Firman wrote...
> Thought I would create a small anim, of a ship zooming past H.E.Day's b8
> space-station, so see how the object would look.
> 
> Anyway here it is.

I don't know, something about it bothers me...  The space station is 
fine, the ship is fine, but something bothers me.  Maybe it's the 
lighting, which seems a bit too harsh and actinic for my tastes, or maybe 
it's the fact that the camera movement doesn't seem to have any 'life' in 
it.  Ah well, maybe if I ever get inspiration, I'll try something like 
this, and see *exactly* how hard it is to get right.

Bye for now,
     Jamie.


Post a reply to this message

From: Michael Zier
Subject: Re: H.E.Days B8 station.
Date: 17 Oct 2000 17:56:40
Message: <39eccb18$1@news.povray.org>
Jamie Davison <jam### [at] dh70qdu-netcom> wrote in:
MPG.1456a86f6fba29b298980e@news.povray.org...
> On Tue, 17 Oct 2000 14:18:17 +0000, Fran Firman wrote...
> > Thought I would create a small anim, of a ship zooming past H.E.Day's b8
> > space-station, so see how the object would look.
> >
> > Anyway here it is.
>
> I don't know, something about it bothers me...  The space station is
> fine, the ship is fine, but something bothers me.  Maybe it's the
> lighting, which seems a bit too harsh and actinic for my tastes, or maybe
> it's the fact that the camera movement doesn't seem to have any 'life' in
> it.  Ah well, maybe if I ever get inspiration, I'll try something like
> this, and see *exactly* how hard it is to get right.
It's the fact, that the camera is moving orthogonal to its viewing
direction. Therefore  the background is rather static. A 'real' camera,
which would be mounted on an other ship, for instance, should change its
viewing direction towards its movement (means change the pitch and yaw).
Then the stars in the background would move across the image. Add a little
motion blur, and you're fine... ;)

Michael


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.