 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sigmund's diamond image inspired me to do
some more work on my old diamond shape.
At the time I made it I was quite tired of
trying different light settings and interiors.
(Round brilliant at my web pages.)
This time I looked at Sigmund's texture and
interior settings. Thanks Sigmund !
The diamond in this image is viewed from
"above".
I'm not sure yet if my diamond shape is so
"ideal cut" that the reflections through
the crown makes the "right" light patterns
when viewed from this angle.
Does anyone know ?
My 100 MHz Pentium PC needed 3.5 hours to
render this image.
Tor Olav
--
mailto:tor### [at] hotmail com
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'diamond01_02.jpg' (50 KB)
Preview of image 'diamond01_02.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Glad I could be of some inspiration!
Although interesting, I don't think the viewing angle is the best. I see
what you mean about proporsions now. I really don't know how a diamond look
apart from a tiny 2d-pic. Anyone know how much brilliant diamonds can
differ?
sig
--
ICQ 74734588
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This is a a beautiful image, and while I was sat here looking
at it quietly I could hear it saying "come on throw some
photons at me you wimp!"
If you throw the code over here I could render it with photons,
it may take a few days because I'd give it low processor
priority but it's worth having a go.
--
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
6:00pm up 2 days, 4:53, 1 user, load average: 2.08, 2.04, 2.01
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sigmund Kyrre Aas wrote:
>
> Although interesting, I don't think the viewing angle is the best.
I'm willing to agree that picturing a diamond from above not
necessarily is the best way to show off a diamond shape.
But the diamond shape is designed so that as much light
as possible is reflected out of the crown. And of course
people therefore prefer to have the diamond mounted with
the crown "up" in their jewellery.
> Anyone know how much brilliant diamonds can differ?
The diamond cutters often try to cut the diamonds so that
it looses as little weight as possible to in order to get
high carat numbers.
This causes a lot of round brilliant diamonds to wary
quite much from the "ideal cut".
Here's a couple of pages that I found about diamond cuts:
http://www.accurateappraisal.com/idealcut.htm
http://www.anstett.com/diamonds/aboutdia.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Eureka/Gold/7365/cut.html
http://www.professionaljeweler.com/archives/articles/1998/jul98/0798dg.html
http://www.professionaljeweler.com/archives/articles/1999/jan99/0199dg.html
http://www.tradeshop.com/gems/diamond.html
http://www.accurateappraisal.com/willthe.htm
http://www.gemex.com/bscopeapplet/index.html
http://www.eightstar.com/
Tor Olav
--
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Steve wrote:
>
> This is a a beautiful image, and while I was sat here looking
> at it quietly I could hear it saying "come on throw some
> photons at me you wimp!"
I'm glad that you find it beautiful. Thanks.
And yes, please throw some photons on it for me !
But I'm not sure if my source code is suited for this,
because I've never shot any photons at any POV shape before.
> If you throw the code over here I could render it with photons,
> it may take a few days because I'd give it low processor
> priority but it's worth having a go.
I have now posted the code to povray.binaries.scene-files
If you do render it with Photons, then I would very much like
to see the result !
Tor Olav
--
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 28 May 2000 06:06:03 +0200, Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
>
>Steve wrote:
>>
>> This is a a beautiful image, and while I was sat here looking
>> at it quietly I could hear it saying "come on throw some
>> photons at me you wimp!"
>
>I'm glad that you find it beautiful. Thanks.
>
>And yes, please throw some photons on it for me !
>
>But I'm not sure if my source code is suited for this,
>because I've never shot any photons at any POV shape before.
>
>> If you throw the code over here I could render it with photons,
>> it may take a few days because I'd give it low processor
>> priority but it's worth having a go.
>
>I have now posted the code to povray.binaries.scene-files
>
>If you do render it with Photons, then I would very much like
>to see the result !
I am currently rendering brilliant.pov in the background, and
think it would be interesting to use the same photon settings
for your image. I'll render them simaltaneously.
brilliant.pov has been running now for almost 48 hours, it last
wrote to file over 5 hours ago so you see it's going to take
quite a while to render. I'm using Linux which has excelent
multitasking so I can carry on with the scene I'm working on
at the moment and not notice that it's already rendering two
images.
--
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
12:21pm up 2 days, 23:15, 1 user, load average: 2.00, 2.03, 2.02
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I've started to render this, but can't get any photon effects.
If someone could alter the code and add the photons and repost
the code in p.b.sf or p.t.sf I'd be glad to render it.
>--
>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
>
> 12:21pm up 2 days, 23:15, 1 user, load average: 2.00, 2.03, 2.02
--
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
2:51pm up 3 days, 1:45, 1 user, load average: 3.02, 2.86, 2.62
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
> I'm not sure yet if my diamond shape is so
> "ideal cut" that the reflections through
> the crown makes the "right" light patterns
> when viewed from this angle.
> Does anyone know ?
I does not look like it is an ideal cut. It seems like there is a "hole"
in the culet of the diamond. This hole should not be there. See attached
image. I played with photons and dispersionsettings until I was happy.
What do you think?
> My 100 MHz Pentium PC needed 3.5 hours to
> render this image.
Uhm, I'm not sure if I should tell you this, but my PIII 650 Mhz took 24
minutes to render ed this image...
--
Børge Berg-Olsen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
+47 90 62 71 78 DoD#2101, DoDRT#017, NIC#015, PJ#006, OGM#007
azo### [at] dodno, Ducati M600 Ubesudlet: Aldri eid en J&%#PS.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'crown_of_diamond_large.jpg' (30 KB)
Preview of image 'crown_of_diamond_large.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Steve wrote:
>
> I've started to render this, but can't get any photon effects.
>
> If someone could alter the code and add the photons and repost
> the code in p.b.sf or p.t.sf I'd be glad to render it.
Try scale 3 on the diamond. Photons seems to dislike small objects.
In addition I have this:
global_settings {
photons { count 10000 autostop 0 max_trace_level 50}
max_trace_level 55
}
Variable reflection looks good, but is much slower than regular reflection.
I've also abandoned dispersion and attenuation. i.e. not much fun left :/
sig
--
ICQ 74734588
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Børge Berg-Olsen wrote:
> Uhm, I'm not sure if I should tell you this, but my PIII 650 Mhz took 24
> minutes to render ed this image...
Pøh, no AA. (just jealous.) I've noticed it has a flat tip; I think that's
what causing the hole. I guess it should have a flat tip since Tor Olav
obviously has done good research on this.
The dispersed light has a strange dirty look. Not sure I can see photons
either.. I guess an ior of 2.4 spreads light a lot so you may want to place
the diamonds closer to the floor.
Just noticed: this scene uses fade_power 1000; that is to turn on a new
attenuation formula in MegaPov. Official Pov should use sub 2 fade_power.
I'm surprised of the speed. I made a triangle mesh for my diamond because I
thought csg would be slow.
sig
--
ICQ 74734588
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Now that one does look good.
--
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
9:29am up 3 days, 20:23, 1 user, load average: 2.00, 2.00, 2.00
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Børge Berg-Olsen wrote:
>
> I does not look like it is an ideal cut. It seems like there is a "hole"
> in the culet of the diamond. This hole should not be there.
My understanding is that the small facet at the
bottom of the diamond is called the culet.
There seems to be many opinions about what is the
best cut for a brilliant diamond.
I now think that I made the culet a little too big.
To make the culet facet smaller one would have to
increase the 8.2 value a bit in the plane { -y, 8.2 }
statement in the Brilliant declaration.
To remove the culet facet, just delete this plane
statement.
If the culet is made smaller or removed, then the
-8.3 value in the bounded_by statement in should
be lowered (more negative).
When I made this diamond shape, I spent much time
searching the internet for information about the
geometry of diamonds.
I found most of the data I needed, but there were
some data I could not find back then.
Therefore I'm not yet sure if all the facets are
"right".
> See attached
> image. I played with photons and dispersionsettings until I was happy.
>
> What do you think?
Thank you for rendering it with photons.
Now I'm sure that I like Photons very much !
I especially like the "fire" that appears
within the diamonds in your rendering.
I'm curious about how the code looks now.
Could you please post the code with your
modifications for Photons ?
I read that Sigmund suggests placing the
diamond closer to the floor to see the
Photons.
Maybe it would then be wise to lower the
reflection value for the blue "ground"
plane so that the reflected diamond image
does not destroy the caustics.
> Uhm, I'm not sure if I should tell you this, but my PIII 650 Mhz took 24
> minutes to render ed this image...
No, no, no, you shouldn't have told me that !
Tor Olav
--
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Steve wrote:
>
> I've started to render this, but can't get any photon effects.
Well, thanks for trying anyway.
> If someone could alter the code and add the photons and repost
> the code in p.b.sf or p.t.sf I'd be glad to render it.
I hope Sigmund will post his "Photon" modifications to my code.
Tor Olav
--
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sigmund Kyrre Aas wrote:
... snip 8< ....
> Just noticed: this scene uses fade_power 1000; that is to turn on a new
> attenuation formula in MegaPov. Official Pov should use sub 2 fade_power.
I didn't know that. I was a little in doubt about that high number.
And I see now from the POV documentation that it was way to high for
an official POV-Ray rendering.
Thank you for clarifying.
... snip 8< ....
Tor Olav
--
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
>
> Børge Berg-Olsen wrote:
> >
> > I does not look like it is an ideal cut. It seems like there is a "hole"
> > in the culet of the diamond. This hole should not be there.
>
> My understanding is that the small facet at the
> bottom of the diamond is called the culet.
Yes, you're right. I didn't study the drawings and descriptions closely
enough.
> I now think that I made the culet a little too big.
I does look like it is a little bigger than it is supposed to be, yes.
Also, a brilliant cut diamond is supposed to have 58 facets, and not 74
facets as in your diamond?
> Thank you for rendering it with photons.
Your welcome, I've traced a new version with radiosity and a little
different settings.
> Now I'm sure that I like Photons very much !
> I especially like the "fire" that appears
> within the diamonds in your rendering.
The fire is caused by a dispersion setting of 0.75 in the interior
statement.
> I'm curious about how the code looks now.
> Could you please post the code with your
> modifications for Photons ?
But of course.
> Maybe it would then be wise to lower the
> reflection value for the blue "ground"
> plane so that the reflected diamond image
> does not destroy the caustics.
There are some caustics visible with the current settings. Have a look
at the attached image.
--
Børge Berg-Olsen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
+47 90 62 71 78 DoD#2101, DoDRT#017, NIC#015, PJ#006, OGM#007
azo### [at] dodno, Ducati M600 Ubesudlet: Aldri eid en J&%#PS.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'crown_of_diamond_smooth_large.png' (146 KB)
Preview of image 'crown_of_diamond_smooth_large.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sigmund Kyrre Aas wrote:
>
> Børge Berg-Olsen wrote:
>
> > Uhm, I'm not sure if I should tell you this, but my PIII 650 Mhz took 24
> > minutes to render ed this image...
>
> Pøh, no AA. (just jealous.) I've noticed it has a flat tip; I think that's
> what causing the hole. I guess it should have a flat tip since Tor Olav
> obviously has done good research on this.
Yes, I was wrong, he is right ... the tip should be flat, but it is
exaggerated in the model.
> The dispersed light has a strange dirty look.
I belive that the dirty looks comes from the pigment settings of the
diamond texture. I tried to set it to rgbf <1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 0.95> to see
if it improved things, but I will not know before another ... ohh, 20
hours or so. :-) If I bother to trace the image.
> I'm surprised of the speed. I made a triangle mesh for my diamond because I
> thought csg would be slow.
Well, the quality settings weren't that good. The last image I traced,
the one with radiosity, took about 22 hours.
--
Børge Berg-Olsen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
+47 90 62 71 78 DoD#2101, DoDRT#017, NIC#015, PJ#006, OGM#007
azo### [at] dodno, Ducati M600 Ubesudlet: Aldri eid en J&%#PS.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Oh! Wow!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Børge Berg-Olsen wrote:
>
> I does look like it is a little bigger than it is supposed to be, yes.
> Also, a brilliant cut diamond is supposed to have 58 facets, and not 74
> facets as in your diamond?
In my shape there are 16 small facets that make
up the girdle line.
I don't think that these usually are counted
in the total.
To get a diamond without these facets, then
just remove these two lines from the Brilliant
declaration in the source code:
MCircleSpread(plane { y, 0 rotate -90*z }, 6.20, FacetSides, 1/4)
MCircleSpread(plane { y, 0 rotate -90*z }, 6.20, FacetSides, 3/4)
(Also increase the 6.20 number in the bounded
by statement.)
> > Thank you for rendering it with photons.
>
> Your welcome, I've traced a new version with radiosity and a little
> different settings.
It looks less noisy now.
Thank you for this too.
> > Could you please post the code with your
> > modifications for Photons ?
>
> But of course.
Thanks.
I'm looking at it now trying to figure out what
is happening.
Tor Olav
--
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
