 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
First result of strip camera Povography.
The lighting is to flat.
But is there an easy way to set up the camera?
To position the cat, I started with a cam_angle 40 and a normal aspect
ratio for a 320x240 image.
Then changed the aspect ratio up<0,1,0> right<0,005,0,0> and the image size
+w2 +h400. Now by try and error find a new camera angle 0.15. Is there a
logical way to approach this?
Ingo
--
Photography: http://members.home.nl/ingoogni/
Pov-Ray : http://members.home.nl/seed7/
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'OnBox.jpg' (46 KB)
Preview of image 'OnBox.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
If the camera-'angle' to rendered-image-resolution formula has ever been
mentioned I missed it. All I know is that angle 67 is nearly the same as
'direction 1' (the old field of view keyword) for the perspective camera. I
think so anyhow.
I don't have any idea what the equation would be to get other widths in pixels,
or height for that matter, to correlate with differing fields of view. I might
have tried at one time to see if it was a linear change but seems to me it
wasn't, thoroughly anyhow. I could be wrong, or it just wasn't perfect enough
to use for everything... some reason I don't have the "formula".
Bob
"ingo" <ing### [at] home nl> wrote in message
news:8EC9F6D80seed7@204.213.191.228...
| First result of strip camera Povography.
| The lighting is to flat.
|
| But is there an easy way to set up the camera?
| To position the cat, I started with a cam_angle 40 and a normal aspect
| ratio for a 320x240 image.
| Then changed the aspect ratio up<0,1,0> right<0,005,0,0> and the image size
| +w2 +h400. Now by try and error find a new camera angle 0.15. Is there a
| logical way to approach this?
|
|
| Ingo
|
| --
| Photography: http://members.home.nl/ingoogni/
| Pov-Ray : http://members.home.nl/seed7/
|
|
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Let me take a stab at this. The "formula" that Bob (good memory for the
angle 67 is nearly the same as direction 1, Bob) was looking for is:
direction_len = 0.5*right_len/tan(radians(ang)/2.0)
If we solve for angle, we get:
ang = degrees(2.0 * atan(0.5*right_len/direction_len))
direction nearest
length angle degree
--------- ------ -------
0.500 106.3 106
0.625 93.7 94
0.750 83.3 83
0.875 74.6 75
1.000 67.4 67
1.125 61.3 61
1.250 56.1 56
1.375 51.7 52
1.500 47.9 48
1.625 44.6 45
1.750 41.7 42
1.875 39.1 39
2.000 36.9 37
2.125 34.8 35
2.250 33.0 33
2.375 31.4 31
2.500 29.9 30
2.625 28.5 29
2.750 27.3 27
2.875 26.1 26
3.000 25.1 25
The default view has a right length of 4/3. Ingo used a camera angle of
40 degrees.
right_len = 4/3
ang = 40
direction_len = 0.5*right_len/tan(radians(ang)/2.0) = 1.83165
Let's keep that same camera location. Set width to 2 and height to 400.
right_len = 2/400
ang = degrees(2.0 * atan(0.5*right_len/direction_len)) = 0.15640
Is this what you wanted, Ingo?
Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Don't know if it's what Ingo wanted but I've always wanted it. Thankyou plenty.
Bob
"Mark Donovan" <sta### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in message
news:389290B0.58D1D188@email.com...
| Is this what you wanted, Ingo?
|
| Mark
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mark Donovan wrote:
>Is this what you wanted, Ingo?
Ooooh yes,
thats it,
thank you Mark.
Ingo
--
Photography: http://members.home.nl/ingoogni/
Pov-Ray : http://members.home.nl/seed7/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
What have you done to that poor cat? - seems to have a slight elvis
complex...
Rick
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
