POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.binaries.images : This is not a Rollex WATCH Server Time
4 Oct 2024 09:17:31 EDT (-0400)
  This is not a Rollex WATCH (Message 9 to 18 of 28)  
<<< Previous 8 Messages Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 10 Messages >>>
From: Charles Krause
Subject: Re: This is not a Rollex WATCH
Date: 25 Apr 1999 13:41:38
Message: <372345c2.0@news.povray.org>
>
>You're right, and thanks for the idea, in fact this horn is a raw file
>output by a program of mine (from equation to raw), and then imported into
>Moray, and, as I have noticed the same defect I had the intention to make
it
>again after transforming the raw file into UDO (Thanks to 3DWin), Maybe i
>will repost the result if it is worth it.


What a relief! I've been TRYING to figure out how to do that horn shape with
CSG - glad to see I'm not (overly) dense after all :)


Post a reply to this message

From: Ph Gibone
Subject: Re: This is not a Rollex WATCH
Date: 25 Apr 1999 17:21:40
Message: <37237954.0@news.povray.org>
First time I relieve somebody : very good feeling !

Philippe

>>
>What a relief! I've been TRYING to figure out how to do that horn shape
with
>CSG - glad to see I'm not (overly) dense after all :)
>
>
>


Post a reply to this message

From:
Subject: Re: This is not a Rollex WATCH
Date: 25 Apr 1999 18:47:19
Message: <37238D92.69BA6802@club-internet.fr>
Very nice even though I don't know how to call it ( I doubt you do
either). I find the metallic texture very impressive.



Ph Gibone wrote:

> And it's not even AWSOME, but fine enough for me, what do you think :
> Comments, Hurrahs, Criticisms are warmly welcome (I'd like to improve)!
>
> Philippe
>
>  [Image]


Post a reply to this message

From: Ph Gibone
Subject: Re: This is not a Rollex WATCH
Date: 25 Apr 1999 19:19:58
Message: <3723950e.0@news.povray.org>

>Very nice even though I don't know how to call it ( I doubt you do
>either).
I know many things that it is not, may be it is some kind of galactic clock,
speaking with the heart of the galaxy to figure out the right time (which is
NOW).

>I find the metallic texture very impressive.
If you are speaking of the reddish one here is the source (very simple
texture in fact)


#declare CuivrePur =
   material  // CuivrePur


      texture


         pigment
         {
            color rgb <0.864567, 0.468733, 0.364567>
         }
         finish
         {
            ambient 0.280567
            diffuse 0.7
            brilliance 6.0
            phong 0.75
            phong_size 43.743333
            specular 0.41
            reflection 0.2733
         }
      }
   }

I use it very often (in "I killed my plumber" for instance)

Philippe


Post a reply to this message

From: Steve
Subject: Re: This is not a Rollex WATCH
Date: 26 Apr 1999 07:09:20
Message: <37243143.DEB5AE1B@ndirect.co.uk>
Kewl.  Put some mist in the teardrop/bolb thingies.

Cheers
Steve

Ph Gibone wrote:
> 
> And it's not even AWSOME, but fine enough for me, what do you think :
> Comments, Hurrahs, Criticisms are warmly welcome (I'd like to improve)!
> 
> Philippe
> 
>  [Image]


Post a reply to this message

From: Ph Gibone
Subject: Re: This is not a Rollex WATCH
Date: 26 Apr 1999 08:27:51
Message: <37244db7.0@news.povray.org>
Hi Steve,
Thanks for giving your advice, but I have some problems with your answer :

1) +ACo-Kewl+ACo- is not in my dictionnary, do you have any synonym ?

2) There is no teardrop shape, no blob but many thingies in this scene so
which one do you mean the big sphere in the background ? I will try +ACE-

Philippe



Steve a +AOk-crit dans le message +ADw-37243143.DEB5AE1B+AEA-ndirect.co.uk+AD4-...
+AD4-Kewl.  Put some mist in the teardrop/bolb thingies.
+AD4-


Post a reply to this message

From: Spider
Subject: Re: This is not a Rollex WATCH
Date: 26 Apr 1999 20:00:28
Message: <3724ECD7.46FDDE13@bahnhof.se>
Hmm.. I have been trying to make a horn for some while, without any success at
all. i'll make some scans of the object I'm trying to create, and I'd like to
know a bit more of the procedure you used when you made yours.(yep, I know it's
a program, but I still want to know more:-)

As for the image, It looks good, although I have noo idea about what it is...
Ok, a clock of sorts, with precision.. ok, how did you say I was to use it?
(what time is it in the image?)


Ph Gibone wrote:
> 
> And it's not even AWSOME, but fine enough for me, what do you think :
> Comments, Hurrahs, Criticisms are warmly welcome (I'd like to improve)!
> 
> Philippe
> 
>  [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

From: Ken
Subject: Re: This is not a Rollex WATCH
Date: 26 Apr 1999 22:42:15
Message: <37251540.764F16C8@pacbell.net>
Spider wrote:
> 
> Hmm.. I have been trying to make a horn for some while, without any success at
> all. i'll make some scans of the object I'm trying to create, and I'd like to
> know a bit more of the procedure you used when you made yours.(yep, I know it's
> a program, but I still want to know more:-)

 The macro that Gilles offers for extruding along a path can easily
produce horn shaped objects.

http://www.mediaport.net/Artichaud/Tran/sources/gtsrcee.htm

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net


Post a reply to this message

From: Spider
Subject: Re: This is not a Rollex WATCH
Date: 26 Apr 1999 22:48:15
Message: <37251625.B2DC47E2@bahnhof.se>
thanx.

i'm looking at it now.


Ken wrote:
> 
> Spider wrote:
> >
> > Hmm.. I have been trying to make a horn for some while, without any success at
> > all. i'll make some scans of the object I'm trying to create, and I'd like to
> > know a bit more of the procedure you used when you made yours.(yep, I know it's
> > a program, but I still want to know more:-)
> 
>  The macro that Gilles offers for extruding along a path can easily
> produce horn shaped objects.
> 
> http://www.mediaport.net/Artichaud/Tran/sources/gtsrcee.htm
> 
> --
> Ken Tyler
> 
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

-- 
//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

From: Ph Gibone
Subject: Re: This is not a Rollex WATCH
Date: 27 Apr 1999 04:13:35
Message: <3725639f.0@news.povray.org>
>Hmm.. I have been trying to make a horn for some while, without any success
at
>all. i'll make some scans of the object I'm trying to create, and I'd like
to
>know a bit more of the procedure you used when you made yours.(yep, I know
it's
>a program, but I still want to know more:-)

I saw the answer by Ken, and he's right (sorry for this pleonasm), but
personaly, I prefer Math (don't call me perverted !). My opinion (very
personal and not a dogma) is : if you can do it with pure math do it so, if
you're stuck, try something else (of course it is depending on the math
skills of the current speaker).

Of course you can melt the two ways and use your math to create the two
pathes used in the Gilles Macro)

So back to math : the Horn is made of a shrinking circle circling around a
fixed point and
here is the equation :

x = a*cos(u)+b*cos(c*u)*cos(u)*cos(v)
y = a*sin(u)+b*cos(c*u)*sin(u)*cos(v)
z = b*cos(c*u)*sin(v)

(of course you can switch x, y and z, here, the big circle is in the xy
plane)

Where a = 10 (Radius of the big circle), b = 3 (radius of the little
rotating circle), c = .6 (this one is a little more complicated to
understand, it measures how fast the little circle vanishes, see below)

(u and v in degrees here)
u in [0, 150] (this ending value gives you the angle at which the small
circle vanishes, it it strongly correlated with the c parameter because c =
90 / ending angle)
v in [0, 360]

What it particularly interesting with these maths is that you know what are
the parameters for, and it's very easy to modify them, if you want a very
thin horn just decrease b, if you want the horn to vanish after a half
circle put ending angle = 180 (Half circle) and c = 90/180 = 0.5



>As for the image, It looks good, although I have noo idea about what it
is...
>Ok, a clock of sorts, with precision.. ok, how did you say I was to use it?
>(what time is it in the image?)


4 h 0 m 40 s, or may be 8 h 0 m 20 s

Philippe


Post a reply to this message

<<< Previous 8 Messages Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 10 Messages >>>

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.