 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
See my original post here..,
https://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3Cweb.626c0f28ac9c0ae18d86850a6e066e29%40news.povray.org%3E/
An animation of 'solid'-looking emission + absorption medias, using POV-ray's
object pattern for the media.
A mesh2 model as the object pattern, with an image_map as the media density...
then all of it heavily distorted with warp{turbulence...}
The slight flickering in the media is, I think, the result of rotating the
entire media object while the media's intervals/samples remain 'fixed' in
spatial orientation, by default(?)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'bunny_test_solid_media_a_4_25_22_kw.mp4.dat' (3969 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This animation is similar to the previous one, but the Bunny artwork fades into
a multi-colored cells pattern... just for fun. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'bunny_test_solid_media_b_ 4_25_22_kw.mp4.dat' (2662 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here's another one!
One of my experiments ended up looking like a nebula of some kind, so I added a
familiar-looking(?) spaceship, and a background photo. This is just emission
media.
The wispy look required a HIGH samples count, to try and keep the media from
showing 'discontinuities' between the samples/intervals as the camera moved
through it. (I should have used an even higher value.) The camera movement is
within a very small space.
Total render time for 400 frames: about 9 hours.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'nebula_media_using_object_pattern_kw.mp4.dat' (3683 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2022-05-12 à 19:17, Kenneth a écrit :
> Here's another one!
>
> One of my experiments ended up looking like a nebula of some kind, so I added a
> familiar-looking(?) spaceship, and a background photo. This is just emission
> media.
>
> The wispy look required a HIGH samples count, to try and keep the media from
> showing 'discontinuities' between the samples/intervals as the camera moved
> through it. (I should have used an even higher value.)
You are correct, you need a higher value for your samples, like about
50% more.
Another option would be to make the shell slightly thicker. Not by much.
Maybe only 5 to 10% thicker could make a big difference.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hi,
"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> Here's another one!
>
> One of my experiments ended up looking like a nebula of some kind, so I added a
> familiar-looking(?) spaceship, and a background photo. This is just emission
> media.
>
> The wispy look ...
is _real_ nice, and also the "fly-though" works for me. cheers.
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Op 13-5-2022 om 01:17 schreef Kenneth:
> Here's another one!
>
> One of my experiments ended up looking like a nebula of some kind, so I added a
> familiar-looking(?) spaceship, and a background photo. This is just emission
> media.
>
> The wispy look required a HIGH samples count, to try and keep the media from
> showing 'discontinuities' between the samples/intervals as the camera moved
> through it. (I should have used an even higher value.) The camera movement is
> within a very small space.
>
> Total render time for 400 frames: about 9 hours.
I love that one.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
