 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
caustics but photons turned out very, very slow. Around 2 pphr! This pic is
a low-quality 30-min render. (250Mhz K6)
I've posted the source in p.b.sf if anyone want something to feed their
Athlons. Maybe someone's got ideas for optimization too.
sig
--
ICQ 74734588
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'brilliant1.jpg' (12 KB)
Preview of image 'brilliant1.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Brilliant composition! yuk yuk
Sigmund Kyrre Aas wrote:
> caustics but photons turned out very, very slow. Around 2 pphr! This pic is
> a low-quality 30-min render. (250Mhz K6)
Ouch! There must be a way to speed it up.
> I've posted the source in p.b.sf if anyone want something to feed their
> Athlons.
I wish!
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricy net> ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website: http://www.faricy.net/~davidf/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sigmund Kyrre Aas wrote:
>
> caustics but photons turned out very, very slow. Around 2 pphr! This pic is
> a low-quality 30-min render. (250Mhz K6)
Cool, glad I could be of some inspiration ... you've found a real gem in
the uncud diamond, that's for sure. ;-) Btw is .png OK to post?
> I've posted the source in p.b.sf if anyone want something to feed their
> Athlons. Maybe someone's got ideas for optimization too.
Well, I fed it to my PIII 650. I think it became to bright, but when I
noticed it had already traced for about 1.5 hour...
Total trace was 3 hours 28 minutes 11 seconds. With photons and
radiosity, max_trace_level was set to 10.
Enjoy!
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
+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 'brilliant.png' (39 KB)
Preview of image 'brilliant.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>
> Sigmund Kyrre Aas wrote:
> >
> > caustics but photons turned out very, very slow. Around 2 pphr! This pic is
> > a low-quality 30-min render. (250Mhz K6)
>
> Cool, glad I could be of some inspiration ... you've found a real gem in
> the uncud diamond, that's for sure. ;-) Btw is .png OK to post?
Hmm, when I study the image closely I cannot see any caustics. I wonder
why, anyone able to explain?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
+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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>
> >
> > Sigmund Kyrre Aas wrote:
> > >
> > > caustics but photons turned out very, very slow. Around 2 pphr! This pic is
> > > a low-quality 30-min render. (250Mhz K6)
> >
> > Cool, glad I could be of some inspiration ... you've found a real gem in
> > the uncud diamond, that's for sure. ;-) Btw is .png OK to post?
>
> Hmm, when I study the image closely I cannot see any caustics. I wonder
> why, anyone able to explain?
As far as I remember the diamond facet angles of a
round brilliant ("ideal cut") diamond are chosen so
that light that enters the diamond through the crown
(the upper facets) are reflected back through the crown.
(Maybe this also makes it difficult for light to enter
the diamond through other facets than those at the top ?)
So if one are looking for light that exits a diamond,
I think that the best viewpoint is above the diamond,
looking down at the crown.
This is a dilemma, because most people recognize the
diamond shape when it's viewed from the side.
Tor Olav
--
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sigmund Kyrre Aas wrote:
>
> caustics but photons turned out very, very slow. Around 2 pphr! This pic is
> a low-quality 30-min render. (250Mhz K6)
I really like this diamond image. Nice work !
I have been experimenting a little bit with diamond
shapes myself, but I have not yet found such a good
viewing angle as for your right diamond.
The composition, colours and light setting is also
good.
But I have two buts:
- Isn't the girdle line a little too thick ?
(Difficult to see.)
- And maybe you should also make the culet a little
bigger.
Tor Olav
--
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Now thats nice! - i have been trying to do jem stones on and off for ages,
but could never get the cut to look right, so never got any further.
Rick
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hm, cool but strange. I haven't experimented much with interior, finish and
photons due to a) slow scene b) exams. It looks too brigth, and caustics
doesn't show up. You should go higher with max trace I think.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
> I really like this diamond image. Nice work !
Thanks!
..
> - Isn't the girdle line a little too thick ?
> (Difficult to see.)
Actually the girdle doesn't have any thickness. The facets just meet there.
I'm not all that sure how it should look; I just looked up brilliant in my
Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary and found a stamp-size drawing there.
> - And maybe you should also make the culet a little
> bigger.
Uh, culet? Not sure what that is, but you can change all the geometric
properties in the scene file. Have a look and render something you like :)
Note: the facets which consist of two triangles have a slight accuracy
problem (sin^2). I guess it could be more accurate if I used used vectors to
get equal normals on the two triangles. I just didn't put more into it since
I was planning on making a bunch of small ones in a heap.
--
ICQ 74734588
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>As far as I remember the diamond facet angles of a
>round brilliant ("ideal cut") diamond are chosen so
>that light that enters the diamond through the crown
>(the upper facets) are reflected back through the crown.
Yup. Actually quite annoying when one tries to use photons.. :) OTOH, it
shows (or suggests) that photons actually _work_ in megapov.
But even though light has 'difficulties' (:) passing from the inside to the
outside, is can easily pass from the outside of the 'walls' and into the
brilliant. (For example if the light comes in at a perpendicular angle.) But
what happens to the light then, is much more difficult. I suggest trying to
use media that scatters the light from the brilliant to see where it goes.
Simen.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
