 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
If there is anyone willing to render this on a large scale, reply to
this thread or the one in povray.general.
It doesn't look so good in this resolution, tho (more information in
povray.general)
Now that I look at it it's more like a tree.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'bush.jpg' (6 KB)
Preview of image 'bush.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
If there IS anyone willing to render it, I'll guess I'll need to fix up
the rest of the image. Any ideas?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I made a little bigger version, that took 7minutes to render. I guess
I'll leave it on all night for the 1024*768 AA render.
This is just to see the level of detail, thanks to Gilles Tran, again.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'bush2.jpg' (28 KB)
Preview of image 'bush2.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'd give it a shot at rendering on a larger scale. It looks like memory
might be the main concern. Take a look at the mem usage and if you'd
think it'd be quicker on a PII 233 192Mb then I'll do it.
Graham.
Lewis wrote:
>
> If there is anyone willing to render this on a large scale, reply to
> this thread or the one in povray.general.
>
> It doesn't look so good in this resolution, tho (more information in
> povray.general)
>
> Now that I look at it it's more like a tree.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [Image]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
fine, I'll post the source(s) up soon
Graham Redway wrote:
>
> I'd give it a shot at rendering on a larger scale. It looks like memory
> might be the main concern. Take a look at the mem usage and if you'd
> think it'd be quicker on a PII 233 192Mb then I'll do it.
>
> Graham.
>
> Lewis wrote:
> >
> > If there is anyone willing to render this on a large scale, reply to
> > this thread or the one in povray.general.
> >
> > It doesn't look so good in this resolution, tho (more information in
> > povray.general)
> >
> > Now that I look at it it's more like a tree.
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [Image]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The BUSH
A LOT can be improved. Suggestions? (Grass?)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'forest.jpg' (156 KB)
Preview of image 'forest.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lewis wrote:
>
> The BUSH
> A LOT can be improved. Suggestions? (Grass?)
It has character. One thing that kind of sticks out is the leaf size vs.
the small branch diameter. If the bush had been recently pruned and the
leaves we see are all new growth then the thickness and abrupt end of the
brances could be explained. If this is a wild, unattended growth, there is
definatly something wrong with this picture. The leafs attached to the
trunk of the bush look out of place as well. If at all possible you
should add the leaves at one greater recursion level than the one they
are appearing on now.
Grass and roots that enter the ground a bit lower.
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nice start... looking forward to future revisions.
The stem of each leaf protrudes through the branch
it is attached to. Each leaf needs to be translated
away from its corresponding branch by almost the
length of this stem.
Lewis <ble### [at] netvision netil> wrote in message
news:3719CD63.97293061@netvision.net.il...
> The BUSH
> A LOT can be improved. Suggestions? (Grass?)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The problem is that it took 10 hours to render
Ken wrote:
>
> Lewis wrote:
> >
> > The BUSH
> > A LOT can be improved. Suggestions? (Grass?)
>
> It has character. One thing that kind of sticks out is the leaf size vs.
> the small branch diameter. If the bush had been recently pruned and the
> leaves we see are all new growth then the thickness and abrupt end of the
> brances could be explained. If this is a wild, unattended growth, there is
> definatly something wrong with this picture. The leafs attached to the
> trunk of the bush look out of place as well. If at all possible you
> should add the leaves at one greater recursion level than the one they
> are appearing on now.
>
> Grass and roots that enter the ground a bit lower.
>
> --
> Ken Tyler
>
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Lewis,
Is it me, or is every branch the same?
Graham.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
