Well I don't know how this compares to some of the posts here, I'll let
you decide.  Mostly this is to help me learn the finer parts of POVRAY. 
Everything is a primitive.  I mean no modellers were used.  I noticed
that my media is making some black lines though.  Do your worst.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'nano_pic.jpg' (67 KB)

Preview of image 'nano_pic.jpg'

The black line "artifacts" are rather curious, overlapping transparent
container objects usually, though I can't tell what you used here.
Doesn't seem to be that anyway.
I've liked this picture from the beginning anyway. No arealight? Just
seems the shadows would never be sharp considering the light source
would almost certainly be large and possibly diffused by the
semi-transparent cellular structures (oops, that's not obvious here
either, the transparency of such small-scale things).
How's that for "dissecting" your picture yet once again?


portelli wrote:
> 
>         Well I don't know how this compares to some of the posts here, I'll let
> you decide.  Mostly this is to help me learn the finer parts of POVRAY.
> Everything is a primitive.  I mean no modellers were used.  I noticed
> that my media is making some black lines though.  Do your worst.
> 
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  [Image]

-- 
 omniVERSE: beyond the universe
  http://members.aol.com/inversez/homepage.htm
 mailto:inv### [at] aolcom?Subject=PoV-News

Post a reply to this message

Wonderful!

Post a reply to this message

Ok - as to the picture - I like it :) You've done a very plausible
bloodsteam, I can easily pick out all the various cell types, and they're
what I think they'd probably look like if I was a micron in height and still
managed somehow to see in the same light range :>

Your little nano-bot is cute, but not terribly realistic. This might not
matter one whit, and if it doesn't bother you, ignore it :) It doesn't take
away from an otherwise very accurate picture.

To get a feel for what nano-machines 'look' like, I'd suggest you poke
around on the web, especially the 'Foresight Institute'. Then, if you want
to model theoretical designs of actual nano-machines, you'd best get used to
a different type of primitive - blobs :) When your machines are small enough
that a ring of 12 carbon form a bearing, then you can see the atomic 'lumps'
in the structure.

Ok - lecture over :)

A very well done picture over all - the rest is just nit-picking - and only
nit-picking if you're going for realism - if you can claim realism with
machines that havn't been built yet - and not everyone goes for realism in
ray-tracing either.

Post a reply to this message

At the risk of pushing the envelope...

Ken is proof positive that, one day, engineers will be able to construct
objects from the building blocks of carbon.

[back me up here Ken] heh

GrimDude
vos### [at] arkansasnet

Post a reply to this message

I think the black is from over lapping container objects.  I used a few
of them to try and make the smoke.  You can't tell from this angle but
the smoke is flowing away with the blood flow.  I tried to make some
turbulence behind the little jets too.  No arealight, I never thought
about that.  I couldn't decide on how to make it look like a thick
fluid.  My attemps at media did not turn out.  Thanks though.

Bob Hughes wrote:
> 
> The black line "artifacts" are rather curious, overlapping transparent
> container objects usually, though I can't tell what you used here.
> Doesn't seem to be that anyway.
> I've liked this picture from the beginning anyway. No arealight? Just
> seems the shadows would never be sharp considering the light source
> would almost certainly be large and possibly diffused by the
> semi-transparent cellular structures (oops, that's not obvious here
> either, the transparency of such small-scale things).
> How's that for "dissecting" your picture yet once again?
> 
> portelli wrote:
> >
> >         Well I don't know how this compares to some of the posts here, I'll let
> > you decide.  Mostly this is to help me learn the finer parts of POVRAY.
> > Everything is a primitive.  I mean no modellers were used.  I noticed
> > that my media is making some black lines though.  Do your worst.
> >
> >   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  [Image]
> 
> --
>  omniVERSE: beyond the universe
>   http://members.aol.com/inversez/homepage.htm
>  mailto:inv### [at] aolcom?Subject=PoV-News

Post a reply to this message

I was just going to say how real can you get with a machine that was not
even built yet.  No I modelled it after an article I read in Discovery
Magazine.  Thanks for th input though.

Charles Krause wrote:
> 
> Ok - as to the picture - I like it :) You've done a very plausible
> bloodsteam, I can easily pick out all the various cell types, and they're
> what I think they'd probably look like if I was a micron in height and still
> managed somehow to see in the same light range :>
> 
> Your little nano-bot is cute, but not terribly realistic. This might not
> matter one whit, and if it doesn't bother you, ignore it :) It doesn't take
> away from an otherwise very accurate picture.
> 
> To get a feel for what nano-machines 'look' like, I'd suggest you poke
> around on the web, especially the 'Foresight Institute'. Then, if you want
> to model theoretical designs of actual nano-machines, you'd best get used to
> a different type of primitive - blobs :) When your machines are small enough
> that a ring of 12 carbon form a bearing, then you can see the atomic 'lumps'
> in the structure.
> 
> Ok - lecture over :)
> 
> A very well done picture over all - the rest is just nit-picking - and only
> nit-picking if you're going for realism - if you can claim realism with
> machines that havn't been built yet - and not everyone goes for realism in
> ray-tracing either.

Post a reply to this message

I remember this :-)

It has improved a lot... hmm, how _did_ they get the coloured cross on that?
It must be rather small... *grin* (pencil and microscope?, nah)

it really looks good from my POV, but then, I don't know how it should look like
in reality(*shudder*)

portelli wrote:
> 
>         Well I don't know how this compares to some of the posts here, I'll let
> you decide.  Mostly this is to help me learn the finer parts of POVRAY.
> Everything is a primitive.  I mean no modellers were used.  I noticed
> that my media is making some black lines though.  Do your worst.
> 
>   --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  [Image]

-- 
//Spider
        [ spi### [at] bahnhofse ]-[ http://www.bahnhof.se/~spider/ ]
What I can do and what I could do, I just don't know anymore
                "Marian"
        By: "Sisters Of Mercy"

Post a reply to this message

ned
Cybepunk books that hooked me... Jhonny Mnemonic... idoru... Darn, my mem
ory...
max_memory_level <15 minutes... *gah*
Was it Grisham... noooo.. that was the one with the dinosaurs(and some ot
her
good ones)... darn this, off to quake and gib some monsters in frustratio
n..
waaaiit... gib, gib, gibson... william Gibson, thats it :-)


Well, sorry about my waste of splace,but I'm frustrated and bored.. lost 
a lot
of work in a crash.

bye.


portelli wrote:
> 

>         Well I don't know how this compares to some of the posts here, 
I'll let
> you decide.  Mostly this is to help me learn the finer parts of POVRAY.

> Everything is a primitive.  I mean no modellers were used.  I noticed
> that my media is making some black lines though.  Do your worst.
> 

>   ---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
>  [Image]

-- 

//Spider
        [ spi### [at] bahnhofse ]-[ http://www.bahnhof.se/~spider/ ]
What I can do and what I could do, I just don't know anymore
                "Marian"
        By: "Sisters Of Mercy"

Post a reply to this message

No I read Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman, The Dragonlance books, and
Tad Williams.  Read Tad Williams, he has a new series out that is
awesome.  T can't remember the name but the latest book is call River of
Blue Fire.  Otherland thats it.  Good stuff.  About future internet.

Spider wrote:
> 

> Cybepunk books that hooked me... Jhonny Mnemonic... idoru... Darn, my memory...
> max_memory_level <15 minutes... *gah*
> Was it Grisham... noooo.. that was the one with the dinosaurs(and some other
> good ones)... darn this, off to quake and gib some monsters in frustration..
> waaaiit... gib, gib, gibson... william Gibson, thats it :-)
> 
> Well, sorry about my waste of splace,but I'm frustrated and bored.. lost a lot
> of work in a crash.
> 
> bye.
> 
> portelli wrote:
> >
> >         Well I don't know how this compares to some of the posts here, I'll let
> > you decide.  Mostly this is to help me learn the finer parts of POVRAY.
> > Everything is a primitive.  I mean no modellers were used.  I noticed
> > that my media is making some black lines though.  Do your worst.
> >
> >   --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  [Image]
> 
> --
> //Spider
>         [ spi### [at] bahnhofse ]-[ http://www.bahnhof.se/~spider/ ]
> What I can do and what I could do, I just don't know anymore
>                 "Marian"
>         By: "Sisters Of Mercy"

Post a reply to this message