 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From Latin, for "to draw from, seperate", the father of "abstract".
Behold my caustics!!! (Based on the graphics I saw on Jacopo Pantaleoni's
page.)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'abstrahere.jpg' (95 KB)
Preview of image 'abstrahere.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
TonyB wrote:
>
> From Latin, for "to draw from, seperate", the father of "abstract".
>
> Behold my caustics!!! (Based on the graphics I saw on Jacopo
> Pantaleoni's
> page.)
>
> [Image]
Cool and somehow inspirational. Caustics at extremo!
Remco
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
If the central luminosity were toned down I think it could be better, although
as is it has a photograph overexposure to it which isn't a bad thing.
Bob
"TonyB" <ben### [at] panama phoenixnet> wrote in message
news:3889cd9a@news.povray.org...
| From Latin, for "to draw from, seperate", the father of "abstract".
|
| Behold my caustics!!! (Based on the graphics I saw on Jacopo Pantaleoni's
| page.)
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
TonyB wrote in message <3889cd9a@news.povray.org>...
>From Latin, for "to draw from, seperate", the father of "abstract".
>
>Behold my caustics!!! (Based on the graphics I saw on Jacopo Pantaleoni's
>page.)
I like, I like. (What is the pattern on the floor?)
jus### [at] rayjayclaracouk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Very nice. I don't' know if it's very abstract, but it's very very
beautiful. Too bad you can't render an "idea" being born in the center of
this. That would be abstract
TonyB wrote:
> From Latin, for "to draw from, seperate", the father of "abstract".
>
> Behold my caustics!!! (Based on the graphics I saw on Jacopo Pantaleoni's
> page.)
>
> [Image]
Josh English
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Very good lighting effects. Is the floor image_mapped?
--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___ ______________________________
| \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
|_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>I like, I like. (What is the pattern on the floor?)
Thanks. #22 from checkers.inc.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Very nice. I don't' know if it's very abstract, but it's very very
>beautiful. Too bad you can't render an "idea" being born in the center of
>this. That would be abstract
I didn't know what else to call it. Surreal? Hmmm... you just got me
thinking... BBL...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Very good lighting effects. Is the floor image_mapped?
That's caustics for ya... :) No, the floor is 100% checkers.inc.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>If the central luminosity were toned down I think it could be better,
although
>as is it has a photograph overexposure to it which isn't a bad thing.
I'm working on it. I wish I knew more about photography. I like taking
pictures.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Cool and somehow inspirational. Caustics at extremo!
I'm glad. Yeah!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Can we see your source? I imagine the object is just a complex blob, but I'm
more curious about the locations of your light source (s) and some of the
settings. I'm still in the 'learning to tweak' stage of photons.
Thanks,
Dirk
TonyB <ben### [at] panamaphoenixnet> wrote in message
news:3889cd9a@news.povray.org...
> From Latin, for "to draw from, seperate", the father of "abstract".
>
> Behold my caustics!!! (Based on the graphics I saw on Jacopo Pantaleoni's
> page.)
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Can we see your source? I imagine the object is just a complex blob, but
I'm
>more curious about the locations of your light source (s) and some of the
>settings. I'm still in the 'learning to tweak' stage of photons.
Right now it is nothing like in this image... I overtweaked... I don't know
how to get these bastards to work right either, it's just guessing, and this
was a lucky guess.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hey, what are you tring to do, start a revolution?
Long live the checkered plane!!!
Peter
TonyB wrote in message <388a5646@news.povray.org>...
>>I like, I like. (What is the pattern on the floor?)
>
>
>Thanks. #22 from checkers.inc.
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think Josh raises a really good point.
Your latin definition was very cool and made me think,
but to make an abstract image is, I believe, very difficult.
If you look at David Fontaine's "Guess how this was made"
it 'looks' abstract but it is, in fact just "Torus Play."
(albeit very good torus play.)
Anyway it's an interesting pic and I'm glad to hear you
say you are going to continue working on it.
Later,
Peter
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Your latin definition was very cool and made me think,
> but to make an abstract image is, I believe, very difficult.
>
> If you look at David Fontaine's "Guess how this was made"
> it 'looks' abstract but it is, in fact just "Torus Play."
> (albeit very good torus play.)
I agree abstarct raytracing is hard because whatever arbitrary
compisition you maight have in your head you have to be able to find
parameters for. This is one of the disadvantages raytracing has to
painting. And how would one even begin going about raytracing a Picasso?
--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___ ______________________________
| \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
|_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> I agree abstarct raytracing is hard because whatever arbitrary
> compisition you maight have in your head you have to be able to find
> parameters for. This is one of the disadvantages raytracing has to
> painting. And how would one even begin going about raytracing a Picasso?
The point is that you cannot reproduce Picasso's work with raytracing
because Picasso worked in a 2D medium. If you want to do that buy a
good paint program. If you wanted a real challenge you would try to
recreate his style but extend it into the 3rd dimension.
--
Ken Tyler - 1300+ Povray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> The point is that you cannot reproduce Picasso's work with raytracing
> because Picasso worked in a 2D medium. If you want to do that buy a
> good paint program. If you wanted a real challenge you would try to
> recreate his style but extend it into the 3rd dimension.
That's what I'm saying, it's much easier in two dimensions because you don't
have to follow the laws of physics (or whatever)
--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___ ______________________________
| \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
|_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think we are working w/ the law of POV ( Point Of View ) but some physical
features are present...
ie: The way a star explodes or caustics but that is all dependent on the way it
is used... NO...?
David Fontaine wrote:
> > The point is that you cannot reproduce Picasso's work with raytracing
> > because Picasso worked in a 2D medium. If you want to do that buy a
> > good paint program. If you wanted a real challenge you would try to
> > recreate his style but extend it into the 3rd dimension.
>
> That's what I'm saying, it's much easier in two dimensions because you don't
> have to follow the laws of physics (or whatever)
>
> --
> Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
> ___ ______________________________
> | \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
> |_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote in message <388B64EF.ADBB22E9@faricy.net>...
>And how would one even begin going about raytracing a Picasso?
With an image_map? :-)
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'm working on an iso version of Rodin's Balzac scupture.
Very slow going.
I think Ken's "WOODFARY" piece was one of the most
unique things I've ever seen done with pov.
Peter Warren
war### [at] hotmailcom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I think we are working w/ the law of POV ( Point Of View ) but some physical
> features are present...
> ie: The way a star explodes or caustics but that is all dependent on the way it
> is used... NO...?
Never mind the physical accuracy of certain features; usually in abstract 2D
paintings there will be overlap which simply is not possible in 3D, like an Escher
picture. The odd positioning of certain paintings like Picasso's would be very
difficult to model.
--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___ ______________________________
| \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
|_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> >And how would one even begin going about raytracing a Picasso?
>
> With an image_map? :-)
How about with Poser?
--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___ ______________________________
| \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
|_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <388CC8FA.3249476B@faricy.net>, David Fontaine
<dav### [at] faricynet> wrote:
> > I think we are working w/ the law of POV ( Point Of View ) but some
> > physical
> > features are present...
> > ie: The way a star explodes or caustics but that is all dependent on
> > the way it
> > is used... NO...?
>
> Never mind the physical accuracy of certain features; usually in abstract
> 2D
> paintings there will be overlap which simply is not possible in 3D, like
> an Escher
> picture. The odd positioning of certain paintings like Picasso's would be
> very
> difficult to model.
Well, you could use the render pigment patch(or was it called portal?)
to make some pretty strange images. You could easily set things up so a
ray basically enters an area, disappears and reappears somewhere else
going in a different direction. You could have a guy's ear appear as
though it is on his chin when the camera is at a certain angle. Kind of
extending it into more than just 3 dimensions, since it could vary
wildly depending on the viewpoint.
--
Chris Huff
e-mail: chr### [at] yahoocom
Web page: http://chrishuff.dhs.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Well, you could use the render pigment patch(or was it called portal?)
> to make some pretty strange images. You could easily set things up so a
> ray basically enters an area, disappears and reappears somewhere else
> going in a different direction. You could have a guy's ear appear as
> though it is on his chin when the camera is at a certain angle. Kind of
> extending it into more than just 3 dimensions, since it could vary
> wildly depending on the viewpoint.
Alas, four dimensional raytracing!
--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___ ______________________________
| \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
|_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote in message <388CC939.247F9067@faricy.net>...
>> >And how would one even begin going about raytracing a Picasso?
>>
>> With an image_map? :-)
>
>How about with Poser?
I don't know about Poser, unless you were trying for his blue
period or something, but Chris Huff's idea sounds like a very
plausible explaination of how to do Cubism with raytracing.
Even though I don't totally understand his (raytracing) concept.
Peter Warren
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> >> >And how would one even begin going about raytracing a Picasso?
> >>
> >> With an image_map? :-)
> >
> >How about with Poser?
>
> I don't know about Poser, unless you were trying for his blue
> period or something, but Chris Huff's idea sounds like a very
> plausible explaination of how to do Cubism with raytracing.
> Even though I don't totally understand his (raytracing) concept.
It was a (lame) joke... Picasso as in Picasso not Picasso's work...
--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___ ______________________________
| \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
|_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
