 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I would like to see an example as created in that high priced, super max,
do everything better software, made for the "real artist", 3d modelling
stuff, and those other things too program, you keep mentioning that you
use. You should be able to do something like this in that max thing in a
couple of minutes to hear you talk. After I see how it is "supposed" to
look I will then know what the realism threshold is that I must compete
with. This will alow me to plan my next move accordingly.
I'm waiting patiently and please have a nice day.
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 12 Apr 1999 13:14:37 +1000, "Lance Birch"
<lan### [at] usa net> wrote:
>Well, the main thing I was looking at was the light fading in the candle...
>(downwards)
>
>You know how when you light a candle the top part is a lot lighter than the
>base (and I don't mean the flame there either ;-) he he he
>
>Also, the top part of the candle should be shinnier than the bottom (because
>the wax is heated and takes on a shiny appearance).
>
>Just a thought...
Do you like this implementation, Lance? This is part of my May-June
1997 entry, re-rendered in 3.1 (no halo). Check the IRTC archive, I've
posted source too (indented and commented :) ). HTH.
---------
Peter Popov
ICQ: 15002700
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'CANDLE.jpg' (21 KB)
Preview of image 'CANDLE.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Peter Popov wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Apr 1999 13:14:37 +1000, "Lance Birch"
> <lan### [at] usanet> wrote:
>
> >Well, the main thing I was looking at was the light fading in the candle...
> >(downwards)
> >
> >You know how when you light a candle the top part is a lot lighter than the
> >base (and I don't mean the flame there either ;-) he he he
> >
> >Also, the top part of the candle should be shinnier than the bottom (because
> >the wax is heated and takes on a shiny appearance).
> >
> >Just a thought...
>
> Do you like this implementation, Lance? This is part of my May-June
> 1997 entry, re-rendered in 3.1 (no halo). Check the IRTC archive, I've
> posted source too (indented and commented :) ). HTH.
>
> ---------
> Peter Popov
Hi Peter,
I like it.
I just visited about 20 candle web sites trying to get a good image
of a real burning candle and dicovered one surprising fact. People who
manufacture and sell candles know absolutely nothing about photography.
In virtualy all cases the candles were brand new when the photos were
taken and the flames were dancing at the ends of their long new wicks.
Added to this the majority were photographed against a light background
that reflected the over enthusiastic use of flash photographay which
nearly washed out the brilliance of the candle flame itself.
One thing that I did notice is that a lot of what I think we percieve
as translucence is as much a pigmentation characteristic coupled with
a soft but very uniform reflective surface. The reflection on the
surface of a smooth candle is pretty high. I would guess a reflection
of .2 - .4 would be close to real.
Also I just lit a candle that is designed to burn down through the
middle and leave the shell intact. Is has a splotchy red, dark turquoise,
and light pink pattern that goes through the candle. When looking at it
in a darkened room there is not nearly the kind of glow that you would
imagine. If aything it looks more like a pigment that has the ambient
setting turned up about .3 too high. Perhaps this varies from candle
to candle but I have no doubt that I could render an accurate duplicate
of this candle without the need to resort to anything else but standard
pigments and finish statements.
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I don't know. Can you find anything uncandle like about the
> appeareance of the candle image I posted. I thought not. Ok so
> maybe a closer examiniation would reveal the lack of the material
> properties you describe, then again it might not. I think I will
> keep you guessing for the time being.
well the candle itself is lame but the flame is incredible. can you
share that code please?
<still banging his head about media>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Scott McDonald wrote:
>
> > I don't know. Can you find anything uncandle like about the
> > appeareance of the candle image I posted. I thought not. Ok so
> > maybe a closer examiniation would reveal the lack of the material
> > properties you describe, then again it might not. I think I will
> > keep you guessing for the time being.
>
> well the candle itself is lame but the flame is incredible. can you
> share that code please?
>
> <still banging his head about media>
Well lame this buddy !
Oh excuse me I got carried away.
It is available at the Pov objects collection at http://twysted.net
the file is titled candle2.pov(zip ?) I don't remember the file extention
listed at the site. It is the number three downloaded object for the whole
collection so I think it is a popular item type. Either that or there
are a large number of confused pov users out there that are snatching
up anything that has media source so they can learn from it.
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Well lame this buddy !
<thbbbt!> ;)
> It is available at the Pov objects collection at http://twysted.net
> the file is titled candle2.pov(zip ?) I don't remember the file extention
ah, thanks, i'll grab it and then look at with no hopes of understanding
it ;)
for some reason i just can't wrap my mind around media very well.
aspiring to ken-ness,
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The render time was about 15 minutes, at AA 0.1
This image made me wish for the good ole' days of the halo, which was faster
and less noisy. But both halos and the method you describe have one
shortcoming - inflexibility. With media, I can apply a density pattern and
achieve VERY interesting results.
For my next trick, I may indeed produce a candle.
Margus
Lance Birch wrote in message <371152e0.0@news.povray.org>...
>While this is OK, I imagine that the rendering time is quite large... what
I
>was proposing is for someone to write a specific function for it... not
only
>would this be faster and easier to work with, it would also have no
sampling
>problems commonly associated with media...
>
>Anyway, I think you're on the right track though and that's looking quite
>good!
>
>Now see if you can do this, a lit candle... :)
>
>--
>Lance.
>
>
>---
>For the latest 3D Studio MAX plug-ins, images and much more, go to:
>The Zone - http://come.to/the.zone
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Margus Ramst
Subject: Re: Translucency demonstration (97 K) - CANDLE.jpg
Date: 12 Apr 1999 08:28:21
Message: <3711d8d5.0@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I also lit a candle to see what it looks like. Mine, however, had a white,
(presumably) more translucent inside. I indeed observed a glow in the
candle, going even deeper than I expected. Almost like an ambient gradient,
but not quite. No reflectiveness was observed, but then, the room was nearly
pitch dark.
Oh, and Peter, your candle sure looks good!
Margus
Ken wrote in message <37119290.3B46385D@pacbell.net>...
>
>Hi Peter,
>
> I like it.
>
> I just visited about 20 candle web sites trying to get a good image
>of a real burning candle and dicovered one surprising fact. People who
>manufacture and sell candles know absolutely nothing about photography.
>In virtualy all cases the candles were brand new when the photos were
>taken and the flames were dancing at the ends of their long new wicks.
>Added to this the majority were photographed against a light background
>that reflected the over enthusiastic use of flash photographay which
>nearly washed out the brilliance of the candle flame itself.
> One thing that I did notice is that a lot of what I think we percieve
>as translucence is as much a pigmentation characteristic coupled with
>a soft but very uniform reflective surface. The reflection on the
>surface of a smooth candle is pretty high. I would guess a reflection
>of .2 - .4 would be close to real.
> Also I just lit a candle that is designed to burn down through the
>middle and leave the shell intact. Is has a splotchy red, dark turquoise,
>and light pink pattern that goes through the candle. When looking at it
>in a darkened room there is not nearly the kind of glow that you would
>imagine. If aything it looks more like a pigment that has the ambient
>setting turned up about .3 too high. Perhaps this varies from candle
>to candle but I have no doubt that I could render an accurate duplicate
>of this candle without the need to resort to anything else but standard
>pigments and finish statements.
>
>--
>Ken Tyler
>
>mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Lance Birch
Subject: Re: Translucency demonstration (97 K) - CANDLE.jpg
Date: 12 Apr 1999 10:51:18
Message: <3711fa56.0@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
EXCELLENT WORK! Looks great Peter!
I'm going to try to model one in MAX and use it's raytraced translucency to
see if I can accurately model a real candle... but with school starting
again tomorrow (uuhhhhh.......) and tests on the first (? 2nd?) day back,
I'm going to be swamped... this post may be my last for a few days...
--
Lance.
---
For the latest 3D Studio MAX plug-ins, images and much more, go to:
The Zone - http://come.to/the.zone
For a totally different experience, visit my Chroma Key Website:
Colorblind - http://www.fortunecity.com/skyscraper/parallax/359/colorblind
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Lance Birch
Subject: Re: Translucency demonstration (13 K) <--- For Ken :)
Date: 13 Apr 1999 03:24:45
Message: <3712e32d.0@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
OK, I've made a candle as you requested in MAX, I must admit it needs a lot
of work to get it looking right, I've never used the translucency blurring
in MAX before, so I think the settings need changing a bit before I can get
the light fading right... but anyway, here it is. The candle is a
traditional dipped candle, so it obviously doesn't look like the previous
posting from you (which looks more synthetic, or at least a "mass-produced"
style).
I've focused more on trying to get the translucency right than the model, so
please don't criticise it TOO much! :)
I've also tried to simulate the bulging which is typical of these kinds of
candles... (the natural wax is not as, um, what's the word, durable(?) as
synthetic wax).
I've also tried to introduce some blotchiness into the wax... it doesn't
show up much on the sides at the moment, so I'll have to work on that...
I'm going to post an example of the "rice paper" shadow casting soon also...
I've made a kind of resin texture...
Anyway, enough talking!!! Tell me what you think! :-)
Lance.
P.S.
> do everything better software, made for the "real artist", 3d modelling
Did I say it did everything better? NO! In fact I criticised it's
raytracer for being slow... As for "real artist" I never said that
either... in fact I believe that renders are just artists' tools.
---
For the latest 3D Studio MAX plug-ins, images and much more, go to:
The Zone - http://come.to/the.zone
For a totally different experience, visit my Chroma Key Website:
Colorblind - http://www.fortunecity.com/skyscraper/parallax/359/colorblind
Ken wrote...
>I would like to see an example as created in that high priced, super max,
> do everything better software, made for the "real artist", 3d modelling
> stuff, and those other things too program, you keep mentioning that you
> use. You should be able to do something like this in that max thing in a
> couple of minutes to hear you talk. After I see how it is "supposed" to
> look I will then know what the realism threshold is that I must compete
> with. This will alow me to plan my next move accordingly.
>
> I'm waiting patiently and please have a nice day.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'maxcandle.jpg' (14 KB)
Preview of image 'maxcandle.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
