In article <3918082d@news.povray.org>, "Peter Houston" 
<hou### [at] inamecom> wrote:

> I think the scanner above the patient could do with some more work.
> 
> Comments, suggestions....

If that big gray thing is supposed to be a scanner, I highly doubt that 
it would have pipes extruding out from it which pass _between_ it and 
the patient.

In addition, if it's a scanner, then it probably deserves some funky 
lights on it (if only to light up the patient from above, so the 
physician can see clearly).

I'm also having trouble trying to visualise where the display is.  Is it 
located 20cm above the patient's head, or is it back about a metre?  
Regardless, it is in a location which would *always* get in the way.  
Why not relocate it to that curved bulkhead-type-thing-with-the-dial?

One last thing, about lighting:  You've got a (uniformly and very) 
bright medlab.  Have you considered dimming it down a bit, and making 
the light sources visible?

Apart from that, I like it.  I especially like the dangling 
pointy-thing.  Maybe I'm just sick.  ;^)

Henry.

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 9 May 2000 13:42:58 +0100, Peter Houston wrote:

>I think the scanner above the patient could do with some more work.
>
>Comments, suggestions....

It looks as if the skin of the "patient" is reflective, or has a thin plastic
layer.

Other than that: I love it!


 /j

Post a reply to this message

Bob Hughes wrote:

> To me this person is reflective, clothes and all.  Wonder if anyone else
> sees it that way too?

I think so too.

--
David Fontaine     <dav### [at] faricynet>    ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http:/www.faricy.net/~davidf/

Post a reply to this message

Bob Hughes wrote
> To me this person is reflective, clothes and all.  Wonder if anyone else
> sees it that way too?

I noticed this myself but I can't figure out what has happened, I added
reflection to all the surfaces in the room (it's all one texture) but not to
the figure, but for some reason it's gained the finish.  I'll have to
recheck the code, I'll try it without radiosity and see if it make a
difference.

> I really like the scene overall though.  Do you use the adaptive aa or
just
> more aa method 1?  Asking because of the jaggies in the diagonal lines.

You've lost me here, I am just using the default aa settings, 0.3 I think.

> About the screen device, I was thinking a couple red and yellow lights
> wouldn't hurt.  Or whatever else which might make it more than just a
screen.

I'll add something to the screen.

Thanks,

Peter H.

Post a reply to this message

Bill DeWitt  wrote >
>     For some reason, this is starting to look like a charcoal drawing.
Maybe
> you need jitter on your area lights?
>

I tried adding jitter but it looked like the whole scene was sprayed with
black paint spots.

Regards,

Peter H.

Post a reply to this message

Henry  wrote

> If that big gray thing is supposed to be a scanner, I highly doubt that
> it would have pipes extruding out from it which pass _between_ it and
> the patient.

Well its not just a scanner, but a complete med station with all equipment
to hand, but I do agree about the pipes, I'll have to do something about it

> In addition, if it's a scanner, then it probably deserves some funky
> lights on it (if only to light up the patient from above, so the
> physician can see clearly).

I like the idea of it having a light source, I'll try it.  I was going to
add some display light s as well.

> I'm also having trouble trying to visualise where the display is.  Is it
> located 20cm above the patient's head, or is it back about a metre?
> Regardless, it is in a location which would *always* get in the way.
> Why not relocate it to that curved bulkhead-type-thing-with-the-dial?

I'll take a look at it.

> One last thing, about lighting:  You've got a (uniformly and very)
> bright medlab.  Have you considered dimming it down a bit, and making
> the light sources visible?

I tried to get similar lighting as appear in the film Alien, the med lab in
that is bright and the light source seems to be the entire ceiling.  If I
put lights on the scanner I may try lighting the whole scene with just
those.

> Apart from that, I like it.  I especially like the dangling
> pointy-thing.  Maybe I'm just sick.  ;^)
>
> Henry.

Thanks,

Peter H.

Post a reply to this message

"Peter Houston" <hou### [at] inamecom> wrote in message
news:39190fce@news.povray.org...
|
| > I really like the scene overall though.  Do you use the adaptive aa or
| just
| > more aa method 1?  Asking because of the jaggies in the diagonal lines.
|
| You've lost me here, I am just using the default aa settings, 0.3 I think.
|

My mistake.  I should have said recursive aa since both methods are actually
adaptive.
Well, I've found recursive aa, or +am2 as it's known on the command-line,
really helps smooth straight yet diagonal lines (any line running off of vertical
or horizontal).  And even if aa depth (+r5 for example) is raised while using +a0.1
with default sampling method (+am1) it can still tend to be unsmooth.
Your mileage may vary  ;-)  but my favorite settings still are +a0.2 +r2 +am2 for
average renders, and +a0.1 +r4 +am2 for finals if time permits.

Bob

Post a reply to this message

Not large enough arrays then (number of sources(?), not size).
'adaptive' could be increased too.
Hmm, just realized now.  If those shadow bands are from one 'area_light'
then that would explain why also.  Very wide separations if so, and that
takes all the more sources in an array to circumvent the mottling when
'jitter' is used.
I had thought you used a large number of really small area lights in there
before.  Wondered why you weren't exaggerating those more to show
soft shadow lines  :-)

Bob

"Peter Houston" <hou### [at] inamecom> wrote in message
news:39191022@news.povray.org...
|
| Bill DeWitt  wrote >
| >     For some reason, this is starting to look like a charcoal drawing.
| Maybe
| > you need jitter on your area lights?
| >
|
| I tried adding jitter but it looked like the whole scene was sprayed with
| black paint spots.
|
| Regards,
|
| Peter H.
|
|

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 10 May 2000 08:37:10 +0100 "Peter Houston"
<hou### [at] inamecom> wrote:

>I tried to get similar lighting as appear in the film Alien, the med lab in
>that is bright and the light source seems to be the entire ceiling.  If I
>put lights on the scanner I may try lighting the whole scene with just
>those.

  Hi, Peter. If you're using MegaPOV, you might try illuminating the
room with ceiling panels and radiosity. Warp made some nice demo images
last year using radiosity in UVPov (and MegaPOV?) where the room was lit
with an object.

  Keep in mind that in the movie "Alien" the director of photography and
cinematographer can use all sorts of lighting 'tricks' that are not
visible in the film frame. You might be able to use things like
shadowless lights, if that is your goal.

-- 
Alan - ako### [at] povrayorg - a k o n g <at> p o v r a y <dot> o r g
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer

Post a reply to this message

Henry <htp### [at] maccom> wrote in message
news:htp-862CEB.23332509052000@news.povray.org...
> In article <3918082d@news.povray.org>, "Peter Houston"
> <hou### [at] inamecom> wrote:
> I'm also having trouble trying to visualise where the display is.  Is it
> located 20cm above the patient's head, or is it back about a metre?
> Regardless, it is in a location which would *always* get in the way.
> Why not relocate it to that curved bulkhead-type-thing-with-the-dial?

  You know, I didn't notice that untill you mentioned it, and all of the
sudden it looks like an Echer pic to me.  The thing it's mounted on *LOOKS*
to be above the patient, but the screen looks like it's 1 meter back.

Post a reply to this message