I like the image, but I wonder about two things:

The lighthouse seems to be leaning a little bit to the right. Is that how it
should be? Or is it my monitor? Or my eyes???
Also, the light-cone gets brighter with more distance from the tower.
Intuition would say it should be the other way round, but that may be
totally wrong when physics are asked. What should it be?

Johannes.

Darcy Johnston wrote in message <36ad4a5e.0@news.povray.org>...
>Well, some time ago, I posted an image depicting my model of the Hatteras
>lighthouse. Here it is again in a scene.
>
>Please let me know what you think of it.
>Thanks,
>Darcy
>djo### [at] inamecomNOSPAM
>http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Sector/4317
>
>
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Really good image.
Only complaint is the muddy ground...

//Spider
Darcy Johnston wrote:
> 
> Well, some time ago, I posted an image depicting my model of the Hatteras
> lighthouse. Here it is again in a scene.
> 
> Please let me know what you think of it.
> Thanks,
> Darcy
> djo### [at] inamecomNOSPAM
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Sector/4317
> 
>  [Image]

Post a reply to this message

Lance Birch wrote in message <36ad6cef.0@news.povray.org>...
>Lance likes it too, and he's supercritical :)


Thank you. :)

>I think however an improvement would be the landscape, it looks a bit
>heightfieldish... I'm not really sre how you'd get around that though,
>because I've never tried to make a shoreline like that.  Maybe it's just
hte
>texture, I think it looks a bit too course for sand (and I see a lot of it
>here).  Or maybe you could add some rocks?  Or are you modelling it off a
>real place? (in which case you obviously wouldn't if they weren't there!)


Adding some rocks would be a good idea. I'll try that. I also wanted to give
the higher parts some grass, so far with no success, but I'll continue
working on it.

Thanks for the ideas,
Darcy
djo### [at] inamecomNOSPAM
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Sector/4317

Post a reply to this message

Bob Hughes wrote in message <36AD9C14.99D656F1@aol.com>...
>Remco stated that too, about the stars showing through the beam.
>A long time ago (version 3 atmosphere stuff) I was bringing this up a
>lot about background objects appearing to sum up a visible spotlight
>like this does.
>Perhaps a media using absorption could compensate for it, I have yet to
>try.


I'll try it ans see what it does.

>Of course the beam could be in a haze and starry sky still show, but I
>wonder of the brightness getting so luminous at the far reaches.
>Obviously the narrower part could be in less a haze where it starts out
>so that makes sense enough but it probably requires some brightening
>nearer the lighthouse and then drastic dimming further away. Darcy?
>media_attenuation off? or just media interaction on ? (default).

Actually, media_attenuation was specifed as on, but I think that was a type,
as I think I meant to have it off. I think I need to have the light fade out
stringer than it currently does. Hopefully that will fix it. Right now the
end is brighter becasuse as the spotlight's cone widens, more and more of
the media gets illuminated. Strengthening the fading and adding the
absorption to  media will hopefully help.

>From what I've seen of this stuff so far though a spotlight in media is
>inherently dim at the apex for some reason. Bet its something to do with
>light quantity, or volume as it were, and the tendancy to sample less
>there.


I would tend to vote on the volume aspect. Maybe if I add a point light
source with very strong fading it would help a bit?

Darcy
djo### [at] inamecomNOSPAM
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Sector/4317

Post a reply to this message

Marc Schimmler wrote in message <36AD96A6.18B62351@ica.uni-stuttgart.de>...
>This is a fine pic! I like the atmosphere of it and I can smell the sea
>and feel the fresh breeze from the ocean.

Thanks!

>That you can the the stars through the beam is OK with me. I have never
>seen a lighthouse beam that could overpower the starlight.
>What bothers me here is that the beam becomes brighter when it spreads
>up. I guess according to laws of physics it should fade! I not sure
>about that.


Yep, I agree. I will be working on that.

>It also points too much downwards if I got the perspective right. These
>lights a pointed to the horizon to be visible as far as possible.


Good point. I'll make sure to straighten it out.

Darcy
djo### [at] inamecomNOSPAM
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Sector/4317

Post a reply to this message

Johannes Hubert wrote in message <36adbd1f.0@news.povray.org>...
>I like the image, but I wonder about two things:
>
>The lighthouse seems to be leaning a little bit to the right. Is that how
it
>should be? Or is it my monitor? Or my eyes??

I think its the perspective. I thought I saw that as well, but figured it
was just me. Now that at least one other person has seen it, I'll pay more
attention to it.

>Also, the light-cone gets brighter with more distance from the tower.
>Intuition would say it should be the other way round, but that may be
>totally wrong when physics are asked. What should it be?


I think it should be fading with distance, but with the media I have
declared, it seems that the more media is shown by the light, the brighter
everything looks. So as the spotlight gets wider, it looks brighter. Right
now I only have scattering declared, I'll try adding some absorption and see
if that makes it better.

Thanks again for the input,
Darcy
djo### [at] inamecomNOSPAM
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Sector/4317

Post a reply to this message

Bob Hughes wrote:
> 
> Remco stated that too, about the stars showing through the beam.
> A long time ago (version 3 atmosphere stuff) I was bringing this up a
> lot about background objects appearing to sum up a visible spotlight
> like this does.
> Perhaps a media using absorption could compensate for it, I have yet to
> try.
> 
> Of course the beam could be in a haze and starry sky still show, but I
> wonder of the brightness getting so luminous at the far reaches.
> Obviously the narrower part could be in less a haze where it starts out
> so that makes sense enough but it probably requires some brightening
> nearer the lighthouse and then drastic dimming further away. Darcy?
> media_attenuation off? or just media interaction on ? (default).
> From what I've seen of this stuff so far though a spotlight in media is
> inherently dim at the apex for some reason. Bet its something to do with
> light quantity, or volume as it were, and the tendancy to sample less
> there.
> 

Thinking about it: if you see the beam of a lighthouse, will you see the
lighthouse at all? In a photograph you could do this with some simple trickery,
so much for photo-realism. Perhaps the depiction of objects may account for
realism, but the representation of light will always be wrong because it is very
subjective (admitted, the color/size/shape of objects can be more ore less
subjective, depending on the amount of LSD you use).
So, in other words, let the stars shine (?)

Remco

Post a reply to this message

Just to point it out again, the question is, would you see the stars get
brighter as seen through the beam of light. I think not. Perhaps the
most obvious reason for such a illusion in POV-Ray is that in real
vision your eyes would counter the star light with any additional light
thus creating a dimmer star. If this weren't so maybe Darcy's lighthouse
beam/stars is what we would see.
For better visual accuracy the un-brightened stars would be the choice.


Marc Schimmler wrote:
> 
> That you can [see] the stars through the beam is OK with me. I have never
> seen a lighthouse beam that could overpower the starlight.
> --
> Marc Schimmler

-- 
 omniVERSE: beyond the universe
  http://members.aol.com/inversez/POVring.htm
=Bob

Post a reply to this message

Darcy Johnston schrieb in Nachricht <36ae5511.0@news.povray.org>...
>Johannes Hubert wrote in message <36adbd1f.0@news.povray.org>...
>>I like the image, but I wonder about two things:
>>
>>The lighthouse seems to be leaning a little bit to the right. Is that how
>it
>>should be? Or is it my monitor? Or my eyes??
>
>I think its the perspective. I thought I saw that as well, but figured it
>was just me. Now that at least one other person has seen it, I'll pay more
>attention to it.


I've seen this too. In fact it was the first thing I noticed. If you load
the picture into a graphics program (Paint Shop will do), you can even
measure it: just take the base points and draw lines to the top of the light
house. It is leaning towards the right side of the picture.

I've cut out the part, where you can really see it is leaning (attached). Is
the beach anywhere in Italy? <g>.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'tower.jpg' (4 KB)

Preview of image 'tower.jpg'

Maybe it is a distortion rue to a wide camera angle?

Johannes.

Post a reply to this message