 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Two different views.
The model is pretty much finished now. Unless there are any suggestions
I'll release it on my webpage in the next week.
Anyone?
Enjoy!
--
H.E. Day
<><
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'DEtest2.jpg' (25 KB)
Download 'DEtest.jpg' (77 KB)
Preview of image 'DEtest2.jpg'
Preview of image 'DEtest.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
<two bits>
a part of me likes this a lot, while another part of me doesn't. it
took a while, but i think i figured out what bothers me. the legs are
traditional mech type, which, while jointed differently, have a
distinctly human feel to them. this makes me expect human style arms in
addition to the wings. you obviously don't want arms, otherwise you
would have put them on, in which case, i would've expected the legs to
be more bird-like (i.e. talons instead of big feet, or even tracked feet
that are somehow claw-like?). everything above the waist is cool,
especially since you changed the wings. the feathers are a nice touch
too. they give it a 'tribal' feeling.
</two bits>
p.s. did you get an email from me about image mapping a few weeks ago?
i didn't hear back from you, so thought i'd ask. :(
"H. E. Day" wrote:
>
> Two different views.
>
> The model is pretty much finished now. Unless there are any suggestions
> I'll release it on my webpage in the next week.
> Anyone?
>
> Enjoy!
> --
> H.E. Day
> <><
>
> [Image]
>
> [Image]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
OUCH! Jpg compression hurt the lasers! but great work all around!
"H. E. Day" wrote:
> Two different views.
>
> The model is pretty much finished now. Unless there are any suggestions
> I'll release it on my webpage in the next week.
> Anyone?
>
> Enjoy!
> --
> H.E. Day
> <><
>
> [Image]
>
> [Image]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"H. E. Day" wrote:
>
> Two different views.
>
> The model is pretty much finished now. Unless there are any suggestions
> I'll release it on my webpage in the next week.
> Anyone?
>
This just goes to show how much camera position can chage the sense of
scale... The first one looks like a toy, but I wouldn't want to be faced
with the second one.
Nice work
Jérôme
--
********************************* Jérôme M. BERGER
* Abandon the search for truth, * mailto:ber### [at] iname com
* Settle for a good fantasy. * http://www.enst.fr/~jberger
*********************************
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hard to argue with that...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Longer wings! Is this the fledgling?
Superb in every other way.
"H. E. Day" wrote:
> Two different views.
>
> The model is pretty much finished now. Unless there are any suggestions
> I'll release it on my webpage in the next week.
> Anyone?
>
> Enjoy!
> --
> H.E. Day
> <><
>
> [Image]
>
> [Image]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'd suggest a very little bit longer for the wings... they could also be in
different positions... like if the mech could fly but with no reactors... that
would be amazing...
I also dislike the idea of lasers... You were very innovative with that kind of
mech, why don't you continue with the weapons? Razor blade claws would be
definately nice... blades that can cut steel like butter...
--
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Simon Lemieux | Website : http://www.666Mhz.net |
| Email : Sin### [at] 666Mhznet | POV-Ray, OpenGL, C++ and more... |
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Those really are fantastic.
--
Cheers
Steve email mailto:ste### [at] zeroppsuklinuxnet
%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps.
web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/
or http://start.at/zero-pps
12:05pm up 22 days, 14:26, 3 users, load average: 1.00, 1.00, 1.00
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Innovative? You want Innovative? Here, eat this. :)
The weapons are Infinite Ionic Repeaters. In short, Lightning guns. The
lasers are neccesary to ionize the air, thus providing a path for the
lightning to follow. The "tightness" of the laser beams can also be
adjusted, making pinpoint strikes and wide area damage possible. There is
only one drawback to this weapon, which is it's inability to function in a
vacuum. Some of the strengths of the IIR is the massive physical damage,
alongside the electro-magnetic circuit damage that results from a direct
hit. Each has it's own mini-reactor, so the overall energy drain is
minimal.
You like them better now?
H.E. Day
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"H. E. Day" wrote:
>
> Innovative? You want Innovative? Here, eat this. :)
<snipped>
> You like them better now?
No. If the object being attacked is well shielded or grounded the weapon
is useless because the energy is shunted away doing no damage. Commercial
airlines, for example, are specifically designed to take several direct
lightning strikes throught the life of the aircraft which causes no damage
to them.
--
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <01c044f0$1483ddc0$727889d0@daysix>, "H. E. Day"
<Pov### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> There is only one drawback to this weapon, which is it's inability to
> function in a vacuum.
In that case, at short range you can just thrust backwards until your
enemy follows you into the trail of ions your thrusters leave behind.
You would quickly run out of fuel that way though...and this looks like
a ground-based vehicle.
Or fire rockets which leave a relatively dense trail of ions. Or just
use the lasers themselves...if they can ionize air to a high enough
degree to carry and direct an electrical current, they are probably
pretty powerful. (what portions of the spectrum are best absorbed by
air?)
Faraday cages might be a problem, you would probably want *some* kinetic
energy weapons. Bullets, high velocity rockets, something a bit more
effective than your beak.
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3A01A8B7.FD4DD154@pacbell.net>, lin### [at] povrayorg
wrote:
> No. If the object being attacked is well shielded or grounded the weapon
> is useless because the energy is shunted away doing no damage. Commercial
> airlines, for example, are specifically designed to take several direct
> lightning strikes throught the life of the aircraft which causes no damage
> to them.
Lightning doesn't have a powerful laser ionizing the air between it's
origin and it's target...insulative shielding would have to be some kind
of ceramic to block the laser as well. And grounding can be a bit
difficult in mid air.
The best defense against this weapon would probably be a Faraday cage
with highly reflective ceramic armor, with a very good ground. It might
work well on large numbers of people, though. Mob control drones? Royal
guard?
It now looks about human-height, still far too small for someone to be
inside in my opinion.
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
How about very large feathers trailing off from the back of each wing
section. Feathers much larger ( like 2 or 3 times the length of the wing
sections) would give the wings the proportion that they seem to need,
provide better balance, and look really cool. :)
Jay Raney
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Or fire rockets which leave a relatively dense trail of ions. Or just
Doubtful, since rocket exhaust would be pretty hot, and with no surrounding
air it just sprays off and diffuses into the void. That wouldn't leave
enough atoms to ionize.
> pretty powerful. (what portions of the spectrum are best absorbed by
> air?)
You would have to take a flouride excimer laser at 150nm. That would be
ultra violet and not visible anymore. One day people might even be able to
build them smaller than the size of three
refrigerators :) (sure would look kind of clumsy on H.E's mech)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3a01ba7e$1@news.povray.org>, "Daniel Schwen"
<sch### [at] geocitiescom> wrote:
> Doubtful, since rocket exhaust would be pretty hot, and with no
> surrounding air it just sprays off and diffuses into the void. That
> wouldn't leave enough atoms to ionize.
I meant fire special rockets which leave a trail dense enough to carry
the current for a short time before dissipating. The entire goal of the
rockets would be to get to the target as fast as possible and leave a
relatively dense ion trail, they wouldn't even need a payload. The range
would still be limited though. Or they could trail a fine wire that
would be vaporized to produce the needed channel.
Or you could confine ions with magnetic fields, but if you can get
magnetic fields that powerful and that well controlled you probably have
much better ways to blast your prey.(spray them with antimatter?)
> You would have to take a flouride excimer laser at 150nm. That would
> be ultra violet and not visible anymore. One day people might even be
> able to build them smaller than the size of three refrigerators :)
> (sure would look kind of clumsy on H.E's mech)
I was thinking of some kind of ultraviolet laser...but three
refrigerators? This thing looks like it's slightly smaller than one
kitchen refrigerator...and it has two lasers. Maybe some kind of
one-shot laser...a high-power chemical laser. Oh, well...if this
civilization has the ability to generate the power in a package that
small, they can probably make a smaller laser too. :-)
As for the visibility thing, you would probably see a bright white flash
before the actual charge is released as the laser ionizes the air. Those
red lines must be targeting lasers. :-)
Of course, with the wire rockets idea(and possibly with the rockets
alone), you don't even need a laser.
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| Mob control drones? Royal guard?
Angels. Don't worry, I'll explain, just not here. :)
| It now looks about human-height, still far too small for someone to be
| inside in my opinion.
Correct. They are around 10-12 feet tall. They are full automated. And
quite smart.
H.E. Day
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| No.
Aww, Ken, can't you just play along? :-)
H.E. Day
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"H. E. Day" wrote:
>
> | No.
>
> Aww, Ken, can't you just play along? :-)
Bzzzzzt....
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <01c04525$17655fc0$727889d0@daysix>, "H. E. Day"
<Pov### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> | Mob control drones? Royal guard?
> Angels. Don't worry, I'll explain, just not here. :)
Ok...
> Correct. They are around 10-12 feet tall. They are full automated. And
> quite smart.
They look around 6 feet to me...maybe a smaller, wingless or folded
winged, 4-6 foot version, with some feathers the same size as the ones
on the big version, and a few smaller feathers that are of the same type
as the big ones. I think that will make the feathers on the large one
look larger, making the whole thing look the proper size.
Ok, that wasn't very clear: make smaller feathers that look the same as
the large feathers to make the large feathers look larger.
They could operate in threes, one large one assisted by two smaller
ones. In battle, the smaller ones could scout ahead, go areas too small
for the large one, do repairs, etc.
They could also serve as "police" in cities. Their size and lack of
wings would make them more able to maneuver through crowded streets,
relatively open buildings, and other tight areas.
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Huff wrote:
> Ok, that wasn't very clear: make smaller feathers that look the same as
> the large feathers to make the large feathers look larger.
Huh?
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Chris Huff" wrote in message...
> Ok, that wasn't very clear: make smaller feathers that
> look the same as the large feathers to make the large
> feathers look larger.
gah?
> They could operate in threes, one large one assisted by
> two smaller ones. In battle, the smaller ones could scout
> ahead, go areas too small for the large one, do repairs,
> etc.
the feathers?
--
Dan D.
"Through the Eye of a Needle"
http://filebox.vt.edu/users/ddombrow/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ryan constantine wrote:
> <two bits>
> a part of me likes this a lot, while another part of me doesn't. it
> took a while, but i think i figured out what bothers me. the legs are
> traditional mech type, which, while jointed differently, have a
> distinctly human feel to them.
I'm not sure I agree.
I have a poster of Nova Scotia Eagles and Hawks, and the goshawk has very
thickly feathered legs, looking a lot like the bell-bottom legs of the mech.
I rather like the legs. Makes it seem more menacing. Vulture-like, almost.
Simon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Now that is one mean Kachina Doll!
Ken Matassa
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3a021378@news.povray.org>, "ddombrow" <ddo### [at] vtedu>
wrote:
> "Chris Huff" wrote in message...
> > Ok, that wasn't very clear: make smaller feathers that
> > look the same as the large feathers to make the large
> > feathers look larger.
>
> gah?
That is what I thought. Don't you just *love* English?
> the feathers?
No, the bird-bots. One large version assisted by two man-sized ones.(One
"knight" assisted by two "squires") The smaller ones would have more
feathers, and about many of the feathers would be about half as large,
but with the same shape and coloration (just scale 0.5). To me, the
feathers make this version look smaller than it should be(H. E.
mentioned it was about 10-12 feet tall). I think having a version half
it's size with smaller feathers in addition to a few feathers of the
same size would make the larger version look 12 feet tall instead of 6
feet.
Then again, having one large bird followed by two small birds might look
a bit too much like a mother hen watching over her chicks.
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ddombrow <ddo### [at] vtedu> wrote in message news:3a021378@news.povray.org...
> "Chris Huff" wrote in message...
> > Ok, that wasn't very clear: make smaller feathers that
> > look the same as the large feathers to make the large
> > feathers look larger.
>
> gah?
>
> > They could operate in threes, one large one assisted by
> > two smaller ones. In battle, the smaller ones could scout
> > ahead, go areas too small for the large one, do repairs,
> > etc.
>
> the feathers?
lol... I don't know about you, but I always hate it when I have to go
one-to-one against a trio of scouting feathers;)
-Chris-
> Dan D.
>
> "Through the Eye of a Needle"
> http://filebox.vt.edu/users/ddombrow/
>
>
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| <two bits>
| </two bits>
|
| p.s. did you get an email from me about image mapping a few weeks ago?
| i didn't hear back from you, so thought i'd ask. :(
I don't know about the "human" feel. I personally designed them the be a
cross between a banty chicken and a golden eagle. I thought I got it
pretty close. :) As for the talons, almost every mech in existence
(especially the Mechwarriors mechs...) has taloned feet. Seemed a bit
cliche'ed to me, so I made feet that would be good for walking on sand.
I did get an e-mail from you a while back. I'm sorry for not returning an
answer sooner. I've been kinda swamped. I'll get to it as soon as I'm
done with the ng's.
H.E. Day.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| How about very large feathers trailing off from the back of each wing
| section. Feathers much larger ( like 2 or 3 times the length of the wing
| sections) would give the wings the proportion that they seem to need,
| provide better balance, and look really cool. :)
Good idea. The only problem is that I've been trying to keep render times
down, and adding that many feathers would put it through the roof. I'm
only working with a P200, remember. :)
Anyway, I don't see what your guy's problem is with the wings. They look
perfect to me.
Of course, when I upload the source files you can all modify to your
heart's content. :)
H.E. Day
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
*VERY* nice! The perspective used in the second image makes the image
take on a whole new meaning!
Could prob due without the laser fire, though..
H. E. Day <Pov### [at] aolcom> wrote in message
news:01c04470$9096c600$607889d0@daysix...
> Two different views.
>
>
> The model is pretty much finished now. Unless there are any suggestions
> I'll release it on my webpage in the next week.
> Anyone?
>
>
> Enjoy!
> --
> H.E. Day
> <><
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
