 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The first image uses blinn highlights (in the blue object) and the second
image uses specular highlights. There _is_ a difference, but how noticeable?
Judge by yourself:
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'blinn.jpg' (47 KB)
Download 'specular.jpg' (47 KB)
Preview of image 'blinn.jpg'
Preview of image 'specular.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nieminen Juha wrote:
> Judge by yourself:
>
>begin 600 blinn.jpg
>
>end
>
>begin 600 specular.jpg
>M_]C_X 02D9)1@ ! 0 0 ! #_VP!# ," @," @,# P,$ P,$!0@%!00$
>M!0H'!P8(# H,# L*"PL-#A(0#0X1#@L+$!80$1,4%145# \7&!84&!(4%13_
Warp,
Somehowe, I am unable to download your complete post. It stops at 50%.
Ingo
--
Photography: http://members.home.nl/ingoogni/
Pov-Ray : http://members.home.nl/seed7/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>There _is_ a difference, but how noticeable?
The blinn is little bit tighter and softer than the specular in this
example. The idea is that you'll feel confident that you're using the latest
and most accurate shading model available. I remember that in MAX they used
a little blinn on cloth, you might want to give that a try.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I did'nt notice a difference, so I subtracted the specular from
the blinn one and inverted the resulting picture. Those lines
seen in the difference picture seem to be artifacts from jpg-conversion.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'blinn_diff.jpg' (47 KB)
Preview of image 'blinn_diff.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I did'nt notice a difference, so I subtracted the specular from
the blinn one and inverted the resulting picture. Those lines
seen in the difference picture seem to be artifacts from jpg-conversion.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'blinn_diff.jpg' (47 KB)
Preview of image 'blinn_diff.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I did'nt notice a difference, so I subtracted the specular from
the blinn one and inverted the resulting picture. Those lines
seen in the difference picture seem to be artifacts from jpg-conversion.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'blinn_diff.jpg' (47 KB)
Preview of image 'blinn_diff.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
blinn seems tighter or just less pronounced for the most part, except for that
horizontal bar section going through the torus, much brighter and still not any
wider than the regular specular hilite of the comparison image.
So is that to mean that the more direct lighting is enhanced while indirect is
subdued? I would think so going by this.
Bob
"Nieminen Juha" <war### [at] punarastas cstutfi> wrote in message
news:38982272@news.povray.org...
| The first image uses blinn highlights (in the blue object) and the second
| image uses specular highlights. There _is_ a difference, but how noticeable?
| Judge by yourself:
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nieminen Juha wrote:
> The first image uses blinn highlights (in the blue object) and the second
> image uses specular highlights. There _is_ a difference, but how noticeable?
> Judge by yourself:
If you look at the horizontal bar where the torus goes around it, the highlight
is much brighter with blinn. The difference is not very noticable, but I think
the blinn is the more realistic.
--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___ ______________________________
| \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
|_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
To answer the question I think the difference is
very noticeable.
Please allow me this small digression.
The textural quality of the blinn image
struck me as similar to the shader
SHW_velvet (by Stephen H. Westin).
Attached is an image using this shader.
(Made with BMRT a great, but IMNSHO,
too complex for the average person
program.)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'SHW_velvet.jpg' (25 KB)
Preview of image 'SHW_velvet.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here's a couple "crushed velvet" pictures that can be done in POV-Ray 3.0*,
thanks to some people at AOL with plenty of helpful ideas. Maybe not perfect
but it's faked okay imo :-)
Bob
"Peter Warren" <int### [at] halcyoncom> wrote in message
news:3898f66e@news.povray.org...
| To answer the question I think the difference is
| very noticeable.
|
| Please allow me this small digression.
| The textural quality of the blinn image
| struck me as similar to the shader
| SHW_velvet (by Stephen H. Westin).
|
| Attached is an image using this shader.
| (Made with BMRT a great, but IMNSHO,
| too complex for the average person
| program.)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'bluevelv.jpg' (20 KB)
Download 'redvelv.jpg' (15 KB)
Preview of image 'bluevelv.jpg'
Preview of image 'redvelv.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bob Hughes wrote in message <38995dae@news.povray.org>...
>Here's a couple "crushed velvet" pictures that can be done in POV-Ray 3.0*,
>thanks to some people at AOL with plenty of helpful ideas. Maybe not
perfect
>but it's faked okay imo :-)
The red looks good.
The blue just looks like some twisted crackle. I see no velvet.
Thanks for this post,
Peter Warren
war### [at] hotmailcom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Peter Warren" <int### [at] halcyoncom> wrote in message
news:38996804@news.povray.org...
| The red looks good.
| The blue just looks like some twisted crackle. I see no velvet.
Thanks and yw too.
Yeah I know. I thought it looked like crinkled plastic tarp or something
similar. It's probably because of the height field being so lumpy. I've tried
the texture on a smoother hf; and now with no phong or specular and only the
blinn. Highlights contribute little to this though. Most of what you see as
what appears to be highlight is due to the negative 'brilliance' instead.
Anyway you still have to use your imagination to begin to see velvet texture,
even then it's like most anything else in that each person will only see things
their way.
Here's another pair of renders. Helpful hint: the letters are raised relief.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'newvelv.jpg' (28 KB)
Preview of image 'newvelv.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Both the red pics look quite realistic I think.
--
Homepage: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
___ ______________________________
| \ |_ <dav### [at] faricynet>
|_/avid |ontaine <ICQ 55354965>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think the red one here looks a little plastic
and the black one is right on.
Nonetheless really nice work, IMNSHO.
Peter Warren
war### [at] hotmailcom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000 19:30:48 -0800, Peter Warren <int### [at] halcyoncom> wrote:
>To answer the question I think the difference is
>very noticeable.
>
>Please allow me this small digression.
>The textural quality of the blinn image
>struck me as similar to the shader
>SHW_velvet (by Stephen H. Westin).
>
>Attached is an image using this shader.
>(Made with BMRT a great, but IMNSHO,
> too complex for the average person
> program.)
Most people I know can't program their VCR,
so what do you call average?
The image and example is very interesting.
Is BMRT still alive and kicking?
--
Cheers
Steve email mailto:sjl### [at] ndirectcouk
%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps.
web http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~sjlen/
or http://start.at/zero-pps
11:36pm up 8:14, 3 users, load average: 2.00, 2.09, 2.09
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000 04:50:35 -0600, Bob Hughes
<omn### [at] hotmailcom?subject=PoV-News:> wrote:
>Here's a couple "crushed velvet" pictures that can be done in POV-Ray 3.0*,
>thanks to some people at AOL with plenty of helpful ideas. Maybe not perfect
>but it's faked okay imo :-)
>
Bob
If you have the source for this could you post it somewhere pleas
I'm sure other people would be interested too.
--
Cheers
Steve email mailto:sjl### [at] ndirectcouk
%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps.
web http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~sjlen/
or http://start.at/zero-pps
11:36pm up 8:14, 3 users, load average: 2.00, 2.09, 2.09
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Steve" <sjl### [at] ndirectcouk> wrote in message
news:slr### [at] zero-ppslocaldomain...
| If you have the source for this could you post it somewhere pleas
| I'm sure other people would be interested too.
Okay, I'll upload it to my links web space as well as putting it at the
povray.text.scene-files group under the name Crushed Velvet Texture.
The blinn highlighting was just a trial of it and not intended to be a
replacement of the old texture so I won't be uploading that, hope that's okay.
It really didn't make enough of a difference anyhow and also limited the use of
it to MegaPov if left that way.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Steve wrote in message ...
>Most people I know can't program their VCR,
>so what do you call average?
I can't,or wouldn't bother programming my VCR,
average, here in Seattle, Cloudy.
>The image and example is very interesting.
I completely agree.
>Is BMRT still alive and kicking?
What, did Larry have a stroke or something?
Cor.
Peter Warren
war### [at] hotmailcom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
