Here's probably just another image in 
my series of uncommented images...   :)

It took me almost 40 hours to render.

I had hoped to render it in 800x600 
resolution with a higher max_trace_level
and with anti aliasing, but after a 160x120 
test rendering I realized that I did not 
have the patience for that.

(If anyone has some idle 1GHz cpu-cycles 
to spare for a larger rendering, then please 
tell me. I would appreciate that very much.)

The image shows the same shape as in my 
the "Inside It" image that I posted here 
12 days ago.

The 2 iso's here are following the surface 
that are formed by Chris Huff's vortex 
function that he used in the image that
he posted here 12. Dec. -00:

news://news.povray.org/chrishuff-6E5F9B.07090215122000%40news.povray.org

I chose to view the glass ball from above,
(because I'm not at all good with horizons
and skies.) But I think that the reflections
would be nicer if it were reflecting some
sky too.

Comments are very welcome.

-- 
Best regards,

Tor Olav

mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'ballandnet02.jpg' (100 KB)

Preview of image 'ballandnet02.jpg'

Is that just a plain sphere or some other shape? The refraction looks
distorted.

--
David Fontaine  <dav### [at] faricynet>  ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

"Tor Olav Kristensen" <tor### [at] onlineno> wrote in message
news:3A75E2D9.BCDC99AE@online.no...
> (If anyone has some idle 1GHz cpu-cycles
> to spare for a larger rendering, then please
> tell me. I would appreciate that very much.)

Send it my way, my computer is just sitting here picking its ports.

-Dave

Post a reply to this message

"David Fontaine" <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote in message
news:3A75F9CC.EC4A0AE6@faricy.net...
> Is that just a plain sphere or some other shape? The refraction looks
> distorted.

    I'd say it's an Isosurface, with vortexes or something in it..  This is
the quote:

>> The 2 iso's here are following the surface
>> that are formed by Chris Huff's vortex
>> function that he used in the image that
>> he posted here 12. Dec. -00:

Post a reply to this message

Thomas Charron wrote:
> 
> "David Fontaine" <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote in message
> news:3A75F9CC.EC4A0AE6@faricy.net...
> > Is that just a plain sphere or some other shape? The refraction looks
> > distorted.
> 
>     I'd say it's an Isosurface, with vortexes or something in it..  This is
> the quote:
> 
> >> The 2 iso's here are following the surface
> >> that are formed by Chris Huff's vortex
> >> function that he used in the image that
> >> he posted here 12. Dec. -00:

Oh - Sorry about this confusion.

I should have mentioned that it is the red and 
blue tube like net that are made with two iso-surfaces.
(One blue iso and one red iso.)

The glass-"sphere" thing is made with CSG, but 
as David pointed out, it isn't easy to see it's 
real outer or inner contours.

If you have a look at the leftmost shape in the 
last image within my post "Inside It" (17. Jan. 
2001 to this NG):

news://news.povray.org/3A6620ED.E32CE364%40online.no

then you'll see one half of the shape I used in
this "Outside it" scene.


-- 
Best regards,

Tor Olav

mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html

Post a reply to this message

Dave Blandston wrote:
> 
> "Tor Olav Kristensen" <tor### [at] onlineno> wrote in message
> news:3A75E2D9.BCDC99AE@online.no...
> > (If anyone has some idle 1GHz cpu-cycles
> > to spare for a larger rendering, then please
> > tell me. I would appreciate that very much.)
> 
> Send it my way, my computer is just sitting here picking its ports.

Thank you Dave !

I'll email it to you (if your computer is still unemployed.)

:)


-- 
Best regards,

Tor Olav

mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html

Post a reply to this message

Tor,
Send me the POV code, I have a 1Ghz machine at the office
that could work all night :-) unless we have another electricity
cut off here in San Francisco :-(

Harold

"Tor Olav Kristensen" <tor### [at] onlineno> wrote in message
news:3A75E2D9.BCDC99AE@online.no...
>
> Here's probably just another image in
> my series of uncommented images...   :)
>
> It took me almost 40 hours to render.
>
> I had hoped to render it in 800x600
> resolution with a higher max_trace_level
> and with anti aliasing, but after a 160x120
> test rendering I realized that I did not
> have the patience for that.
>
> (If anyone has some idle 1GHz cpu-cycles
> to spare for a larger rendering, then please
> tell me. I would appreciate that very much.)
>
> The image shows the same shape as in my
> the "Inside It" image that I posted here
> 12 days ago.
>
> The 2 iso's here are following the surface
> that are formed by Chris Huff's vortex
> function that he used in the image that
> he posted here 12. Dec. -00:
>
> news://news.povray.org/chrishuff-6E5F9B.07090215122000%40news.povray.org
>
> I chose to view the glass ball from above,
> (because I'm not at all good with horizons
> and skies.) But I think that the reflections
> would be nicer if it were reflecting some
> sky too.
>
> Comments are very welcome.
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> Tor Olav
>
> mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
> http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

Post a reply to this message

Tor,
I'm rendering it now at 800x600. It is only half finished and I estimate
it will take about another 30 hours. I'm running it at the office and
I won't be in over the weekend, so I'll post it on Monday.

Harold

"Tor Olav Kristensen" <tor### [at] onlineno> wrote in message
news:3A75E2D9.BCDC99AE@online.no...
>
> Here's probably just another image in
> my series of uncommented images...   :)
>
> It took me almost 40 hours to render.
>
> I had hoped to render it in 800x600
> resolution with a higher max_trace_level
> and with anti aliasing, but after a 160x120
> test rendering I realized that I did not
> have the patience for that.
>
> (If anyone has some idle 1GHz cpu-cycles
> to spare for a larger rendering, then please
> tell me. I would appreciate that very much.)
>
> The image shows the same shape as in my
> the "Inside It" image that I posted here
> 12 days ago.
>
> The 2 iso's here are following the surface
> that are formed by Chris Huff's vortex
> function that he used in the image that
> he posted here 12. Dec. -00:
>
> news://news.povray.org/chrishuff-6E5F9B.07090215122000%40news.povray.org
>
> I chose to view the glass ball from above,
> (because I'm not at all good with horizons
> and skies.) But I think that the reflections
> would be nicer if it were reflecting some
> sky too.
>
> Comments are very welcome.
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> Tor Olav
>
> mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
> http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

Post a reply to this message

Harold Baize wrote:
> 
> Tor,
> I'm rendering it now at 800x600. It is only half finished and I estimate
> it will take about another 30 hours. I'm running it at the office and
> I won't be in over the weekend, so I'll post it on Monday.

Hello Baize.

Thank you for doing this.

I guess Dave forwarded the pov-file to you.

Now I'm looking forward to see the result.

:)


-- 
Best regards,

Tor Olav

mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok

Post a reply to this message

Well here is an 800x600 render. It took my 1GHz P-III
46hours, and 56.43seconds. It seem lighter than Tor's
low resolution render. Also, does anyone know how to
get the copyright symbol to print in PaintShop Pro?
I don't. Sorry Tor.

Harold

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'BallAndNet02_01.jpg' (153 KB)

Preview of image 'BallAndNet02_01.jpg'

Harold Baize wrote:
> 
> Well here is an 800x600 render. It took my 1GHz P-III
> 46hours, and 56.43seconds. It seem lighter than Tor's
> low resolution render. Also, does anyone know how to
> get the copyright symbol to print in PaintShop Pro?
> I don't. Sorry Tor.
> 

What's wrong with © (code 169)?

BTW, what max_trace_level did you use?

Christoph

-- 
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other 
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

There's nothing wrong with code 169, I just don't know
how to enter it into the PaintShop Pro text window. One
way is to cut and paste the symbol from a Word document,
should have done that. Oh well.

The max trace was set at 25. This is all Tor's work, I just ran
my computer for him.

Harold

"Christoph Hormann" <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3A7EF1DB.CF44EF49@gmx.de...
>
> What's wrong with © (code 169)?
>
> BTW, what max_trace_level did you use?
>
> Christoph

Post a reply to this message

Harold Baize wrote:

> There's nothing wrong with code 169, I just don't know
> how to enter it into the PaintShop Pro text window. One
> way is to cut and paste the symbol from a Word document,
> should have done that. Oh well.

Get any extended ASCII character by holding alt and typing zero followed
by its three-digit code in base ten. ie, to get char 169 © type
ALT+0169, to get char 233 é type ALT+0233... you don't even need to know
hexadecimal! :)


--
David Fontaine  <dav### [at] faricynet>  ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

Thanks David! I was forgetting the zero.
I kept trying 169 and it wouldn't work. The 233
will also help me because my girlfriend's name is
Andrée!

Although, as I type this I'm unable to enter the
character codes. Wonder why? There must be
some setting in Windows that I need to change.


Thanks again for pointing out the need for the leading zero.
Harold

"David Fontaine" <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote in message
news:3A7F2D5E.11C7E4A9@faricy.net...
> Harold Baize wrote:
>
> > There's nothing wrong with code 169, I just don't know
> > how to enter it into the PaintShop Pro text window. One
> > way is to cut and paste the symbol from a Word document,
> > should have done that. Oh well.
>
> Get any extended ASCII character by holding alt and typing zero followed
> by its three-digit code in base ten. ie, to get char 169 © type
> ALT+0169, to get char 233 é type ALT+0233... you don't even need to know
> hexadecimal! :)
>
>
> --
> David Fontaine  <dav### [at] faricynet>  ICQ 55354965
> My raytracing gallery:  http://davidf.faricy.net/
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Well, after much trial and error I have discovered that I can get
the desired extended ASCII characters by holding the Ctrl+Alt
and specific keys on the keyboard. Ctrl+Alt+c gives © and
Ctrl+Alt+e types a é. Unfortunately it varies slightly by font.

Harold

> Get any extended ASCII character by holding alt and typing zero followed
> by its three-digit code in base ten. ie, to get char 169 © type
> ALT+0169, to get char 233 é type ALT+0233... you don't even need to know
> hexadecimal! :)
>

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 5 Feb 2001 15:31:02 -0800, Harold Baize wrote...
> Thanks David! I was forgetting the zero.
> I kept trying 169 and it wouldn't work. The 233
> will also help me because my girlfriend's name is
> Andrée!
> 
> Although, as I type this I'm unable to enter the
> character codes. Wonder why? There must be
> some setting in Windows that I need to change.

Are you using the numeric keypad or the strip of numbers above the main 
section of the keyboard?  IIRC, you need to use they keypad to get it to 
work, for some reason which escapes me.

Bye for now,
     Jamie.

Post a reply to this message

Harold Baize wrote:

>low resolution render. Also, does anyone know how to
>get the copyright symbol to print in PaintShop Pro?

        I assume you are running windows (since as far as I
know (I could be wrong) paintshop pro is a windows-only
program).  If not, completely ignore this post.  :-)
        From the Start Menu, go to Programs, Accessories,
launch Key Map.  Key map allows you to select and copy to the
clipboard any characters that you cannot get directly from the
keyboard.  It has been part of windows since version 3.0 at
least and is much easier than remembering all of those codes.

Pete

Post a reply to this message

Harold Baize wrote:
> 
> Well here is an 800x600 render. It took my 1GHz P-III
> 46hours, and 56.43seconds. It seem lighter than Tor's
> low resolution render. 
>...

Yes it's lighter.

I modified the code a bit for this rendering,
but now I see that I should have made the pigments 
of the "iso-net" less bright.


-- 
Best regards,

Tor Olav

mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok

Post a reply to this message

Pete wrote:
>         From the Start Menu, go to Programs, Accessories,
> launch Key Map.  Key map allows you to select and copy to the
> clipboard any characters that you cannot get directly from the
> keyboard.  It has been part of windows since version 3.0 at
> least and is much easier than remembering all of those codes.

It's called Character Map on mine (Start->Programs->Accessories->Character
Map).

Has two major advantages over ALT+#.
First (and most obvious) being that you dont have to remember the numbers.
Second less obvious advantage, sometimes you will find that in certain
fonts, the characters can move about a bit. Character Map allows you to
select the font you are using in PaintShop, and will allow you to pick from
the characters in that font set.


Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)

Post a reply to this message

Duncan Gray wrote:

> Second less obvious advantage, sometimes you will find that in certain
> fonts, the characters can move about a bit.

The characters may be entirely different altogether in cases of specialized
fonts, for diaplying mathematical or phonetical characters etc. But if the
standard character does exist it should be in its proper spot. If it's not,
then whoever designed the font is simply *wrong*, and it's a font you can
probably do without. This is especially important online because someone else
might be using a different font to view your material. (This sounds like my
rant on order of operations, but consistency is very important with computers!
(ahem M$ wink wink nudge nudge ;))

--
David Fontaine  <dav### [at] faricynet>  ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

Duncan Wrote:

>It's called Character Map on mine (Start->Programs->Accessories->Character
>Map).

        WOOPS!  My fault!  You are correct.  I wrote from memory
on a non-windows computer so I had the name of the program
wrong.  My apologies!

Pete

Post a reply to this message