 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I just found that POV-Ray had finished this image for me :)
This image also has an "overexposed" area, as Christoph
mentioned about my "Other Bonds" image.
Again I have borrowed code from others:
For the radiosity settings I started with those in
Xplo's post to povray.text.scene-files in August:
news://news.povray.org/399E20BC.BFD87A13%40unforgettable.com
(Ermm... I modified them without knowing what I was doing.)
And for the textures and colors I modified (slightly)
those that Gilles posted here:
news://news.povray.org/398EE231.F90E52DC%40inapg.inra.fr
The rendering time this for this image was about 6 hours.
--
Best regards,
Tor Olav
mailto:tor### [at] hotmail com
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'fung14.jpg' (37 KB)
Preview of image 'fung14.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rad! Totally frickin' awesome!!!!
IMO the overexposed area looks cool.
I always liked mushroom shapes. I used to sketch nuclear explosions...
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Superb!
I too like the overexposed area.
I assume this is an isosurface?
I sure wish I had your mastery over them.
Mick
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
>
> I just found that POV-Ray had finished this image for me :)
>
> This image also has an "overexposed" area, as Christoph
> mentioned about my "Other Bonds" image.
>
> Again I have borrowed code from others:
>
> For the radiosity settings I started with those in
> Xplo's post to povray.text.scene-files in August:
>
> news://news.povray.org/399E20BC.BFD87A13%40unforgettable.com
> (Ermm... I modified them without knowing what I was doing.)
>
> And for the textures and colors I modified (slightly)
> those that Gilles posted here:
>
> news://news.povray.org/398EE231.F90E52DC%40inapg.inra.fr
>
> The rendering time this for this image was about 6 hours.
>
You might try reducing the light source a bit (to reduce the overexposure)
and set recursion_limit to 2 to weaken the strong shadows in the back
sections. Also could use an isosurface instead of normal, i posted some
comparison test some time ago:
Subject: Re: YMFWR
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000
Of course that would be *really* slow...
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nice! I've admired many of your mathematical images, but the texures
have been less than astonishing :) I'm happy to finally see you
experimenting with textures and radiosity!
sig
--
ICQ 74734588
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Wow. I'm gobsmacked.
I'd like to offer some form of suggestion as to how to improve it ... but I
cant ...
Perfect.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
>
> Rad! Totally frickin' awesome!!!!
> IMO the overexposed area looks cool.
Thanks David !
> I always liked mushroom shapes. I used to sketch nuclear explosions...
That's strange. I've been drawing sketches
of such shapes for about a year now.
But I haven't drawn any nuclear mushrooms yet.
Maybe someone could render such a cloud.
(Perhaps with media =)
--
Best regards,
Tor Olav
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://hjem.sol.no/t-o-k/tokpicts.html
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mick Hazelgrove wrote:
>
> Superb!
Thanks !
> I too like the overexposed area.
Maybe me too can learn to like it overexposed.
> I assume this is an isosurface?
No, it's made with CSG.
> I sure wish I had your mastery over them.
Now you made me think about how one could
make this shape with an iso.
Unfortunately I don't know how to make
the "blobbing" go inwards and then outwards
again. Hmmm...
--
Best regards,
Tor Olav
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://hjem.sol.no/t-o-k/tokpicts.html
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
> Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
> >
> > I just found that POV-Ray had finished this image for me :)
> >
> > This image also has an "overexposed" area, as Christoph
> > mentioned about my "Other Bonds" image.
> >
> > Again I have borrowed code from others:
> >
> > For the radiosity settings I started with those in
> > Xplo's post to povray.text.scene-files in August:
> >
> > news://news.povray.org/399E20BC.BFD87A13%40unforgettable.com
> > (Ermm... I modified them without knowing what I was doing.)
> >
> > And for the textures and colors I modified (slightly)
> > those that Gilles posted here:
> >
> > news://news.povray.org/398EE231.F90E52DC%40inapg.inra.fr
> >
> > The rendering time this for this image was about 6 hours.
> >
>
> You might try reducing the light source a bit (to reduce the overexposure)
> and set recursion_limit to 2 to weaken the strong shadows in the back
> sections.
I have now dimmed down the main light source and reduced the
recursion_limit from 4 to 3 and started a new rendering.
Hopefully I'll see the result tomorrow when I come home from work.
> Also could use an isosurface instead of normal, i posted some
> comparison test some time ago:
But would this be possible when the shape is made with CSG ?
... Or are there any "iso-normals" in MegaPOV ?
> Subject: Re: YMFWR
> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000
>
> Of course that would be *really* slow...
I'm to tired now, so I'll have to look into that tomorrow.
Thanks again for your advice.
--
Best regards,
Tor Olav
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://hjem.sol.no/t-o-k/tokpicts.html
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sigmund Kyrre Aas wrote:
>
> Nice! I've admired many of your mathematical images, but the texures
> have been less than astonishing :) I'm happy to finally see you
> experimenting with textures and radiosity!
Thanks Sigmund.
It has been a long time since I've heard from
another Norwegian in here.
Yes I know. You're very right about my textures :(
I have had a tendency to only use plain pigments
and some 3 or 4 standard POV-include textures.
The reason for this might be that when I have
been thinking of an "geometrical" idea for a day
or two (or ten ), and then found a solution, done
all the macro writing and simplifying, I have no
more patience to tweak textures.
(I only get frustrated when I can't get the
textures to behave as I want.)
So unfortunately I just skip that texture part,
and then jump to the part where I can use my
code to build the shapes I've been "seeing".
The reason for not using those Cool-Tools
within MegaPOV is that I have been afraid that
I should like them so much that I would get
very angry at my slow PC.
--
Best regards,
Tor Olav
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://hjem.sol.no/t-o-k/tokpicts.html
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Duncan Gray wrote:
>
> Wow. I'm gobsmacked.
>
> I'd like to offer some form of suggestion as to how to improve it ... but I
> cant ...
>
> Perfect.
Thank you very much anyway !
(I'll have to look up "gobsmacked" somewhere,
but I have a feeling that my dictionary doesn't
have that word :)
--
Best regards,
Tor Olav
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://hjem.sol.no/t-o-k/tokpicts.html
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
>
> I have now dimmed down the main light source and reduced the
> recursion_limit from 4 to 3 and started a new rendering.
>
> Hopefully I'll see the result tomorrow when I come home from work.
>
Ooops, i thought you were using recursion_limit 1, if you use 3 or 4, this
seems perfectly ok.
>
> But would this be possible when the shape is made with CSG ?
>
> ... Or are there any "iso-normals" in MegaPOV ?
>
No, but in this case you could try to code the CSG in an isosurface
function although it's probably not worth the work, because it will be
extremely slow.
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
> (I'll have to look up "gobsmacked" somewhere,
> but I have a feeling that my dictionary doesn't
> have that word :)
My apologies - I must be more careful with my use of English - your English
is so good that I forget it is not your first language.
My definition of Gobsmacked would be:
Stunned. As though one has just been slapped across the face with a large
fish.
But my dictionary defines it as:
Gobsmacked: Adjective. (slang) Flabbergasted, utterly amazed or overawed.
Flabbergasted: Astounded (to shock with surprise)
Overawed: Overcome with awe (respect or admiration)
Therefore if I may respond again to your picture:
--
Wow. I am utterly amazed by you picture and as stunned as person who has
just been slapped on the face with a large, wet fish. The first view of your
picture shocked and supprised me and left me feeling overcome with respect
and admiration for you and your work.
(I liked it very much. But such a short phrase cannot possibly describe how
much I liked it :-)
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Duncan Gray wrote:
>
> Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
> > (I'll have to look up "gobsmacked" somewhere,
> > but I have a feeling that my dictionary doesn't
> > have that word :)
>
> My apologies - I must be more careful with my use of English - your English
> is so good that I forget it is not your first language.
>
> My definition of Gobsmacked would be:
>
> Stunned. As though one has just been slapped across the face with a large
> fish.
>
> But my dictionary defines it as:
>
> Gobsmacked: Adjective. (slang) Flabbergasted, utterly amazed or overawed.
> Flabbergasted: Astounded (to shock with surprise)
> Overawed: Overcome with awe (respect or admiration)
>
> Therefore if I may respond again to your picture:
>
> --
> Wow. I am utterly amazed by you picture and as stunned as person who has
> just been slapped on the face with a large, wet fish. The first view of your
> picture shocked and supprised me and left me feeling overcome with respect
> and admiration for you and your work.
>
> (I liked it very much. But such a short phrase cannot possibly describe how
> much I liked it :-)
Hi Duncan
I don't know what to say ...
except for THANKS (and that I'm blushing).
=)
P.S.:
Please don't stop using strange words.
- I like to learn new ones.
--
Best regards,
Tor Olav
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://hjem.sol.no/t-o-k/tokpicts.html
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 03:24:54 +0100, Tor Olav Kristensen <tor### [at] hotmailcom>
wrote:
<snip>
I thought this was a strikingly original image when I saw it, but now, after
reading the the excerpt below from the science section of today's Guardian
newspaper, I see Tor, that you have just been looking through your molecule
scanning microscope :-)
"For years ATP was called the powerhouse of the cell, but this
was a metaphor: no one expected it actually to rotate like a
turbine, but this is in fact what it does. The ATP motor is an
enzyme, ATP synthase, with a structure that has been likened
to a mushroom: six pods sit around a spindle, and the reaction
precesses around the six heads. In the cell the rotation itself
does not drive anything physically: it is a byproduct of the cyclic
reactions that have to cascade to keep going. In living cells, the
energy produced is passed down an electrochemical chain of
reactions until it finds useful work to do, in moving a muscle, for
example."
----------------------
dav### [at] hamiltonitecom
http://hamiltonite.com/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Wilkinson wrote:
> I thought this was a strikingly original image when I saw it, but now, after
> reading the the excerpt below from the science section of today's Guardian
> newspaper, I see Tor, that you have just been looking through your molecule
> scanning microscope :-)
> ...
> to a mushroom: six pods sit around a spindle, and the reaction
> ...
But if you look closely there's an irregularity, Tor's has 7 :)
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 23 Feb 2001 16:05:16 -0600, David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote:
>David Wilkinson wrote:
>
>> I thought this was a strikingly original image when I saw it, but now, after
>> reading the the excerpt below from the science section of today's Guardian
>> newspaper, I see Tor, that you have just been looking through your molecule
>> scanning microscope :-)
>> ...
>> to a mushroom: six pods sit around a spindle, and the reaction
>> ...
>
>But if you look closely there's an irregularity, Tor's has 7 :)
Evolution strikes again!
----------------------
dav### [at] hamiltonitecom
http://hamiltonite.com/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Wilkinson wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 03:24:54 +0100, Tor Olav Kristensen <tor### [at] hotmailcom>
> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> I thought this was a strikingly original image when I saw it, but now, after
> reading the the excerpt below from the science section of today's Guardian
> newspaper, I see Tor, that you have just been looking through your molecule
> scanning microscope :-)
>
> "For years ATP was called the powerhouse of the cell, but this
> was a metaphor: no one expected it actually to rotate like a
> turbine, but this is in fact what it does. The ATP motor is an
> enzyme, ATP synthase, with a structure that has been likened
> to a mushroom: six pods sit around a spindle, and the reaction
> precesses around the six heads. In the cell the rotation itself
> does not drive anything physically: it is a byproduct of the cyclic
> reactions that have to cascade to keep going. In living cells, the
> energy produced is passed down an electrochemical chain of
> reactions until it finds useful work to do, in moving a muscle, for
> example."
=)
Did they show any pictures ?
I wish I had such molecule scanning microscope...
or even a plain microscope to put my Nikon onto.
Those macro and micro worlds are very exiting !
--
Best regards,
Tor Olav
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://hjem.sol.no/t-o-k/tokpicts.html
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
>
> David Wilkinson wrote:
>
> > I thought this was a strikingly original image when I saw it, but now, after
> > reading the the excerpt below from the science section of today's Guardian
> > newspaper, I see Tor, that you have just been looking through your molecule
> > scanning microscope :-)
> > ...
> > to a mushroom: six pods sit around a spindle, and the reaction
> > ...
>
> But if you look closely there's an irregularity, Tor's has 7 :)
The wide angled camera deceives your eyes.
It's actually 8 mushpods there (like at the corners of a cube).
--
Best regards,
Tor Olav
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://hjem.sol.no/t-o-k/tokpicts.html
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
> ...
> It's actually 8 mushpods there (like at the corners of a cube).
Sorry.
Not like in a cube, cause the lower 4 are
rotated 45 degrees around the y-axis.
--
Best regards,
Tor Olav
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://hjem.sol.no/t-o-k/tokpicts.html
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
