Just did this, as a simple Background-Wallpaper, to complete my
windows-theme and thought about to share it ...
I did it quite fast in Moray, but it rendered (cause of the
focalblur) in about 8 hours in 1280x960 ...

Some comments ???



--

 ,',    Jan Walzer      \V/  http://wa.lzer.net     ,',
',','   student of      >|<  mailto:jan### [at] lzernet ',','
  '   ComputerScience   /A\  +49-177-7403863         '

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'PovBG.jpg' (38 KB)

Preview of image 'PovBG.jpg'

Nice one.
One comment : You should play with the confidence and variance value for
the focal_blur . ( Confidence with something like 0.999999 and variance
with 1/1000000). It is going to take longer to render but the sphere in
the background will look better.





> Just did this, as a simple Background-Wallpaper, to complete my
> windows-theme and thought about to share it ...
> I did it quite fast in Moray, but it rendered (cause of the
> focalblur) in about 8 hours in 1280x960 ...
>
> Some comments ???
>
> --
>
>  ,',    Jan Walzer      \V/  http://wa.lzer.net     ,',
> ',','   student of      >|<  mailto:jan### [at] lzernet ',','
>   '   ComputerScience   /A\  +49-177-7403863         '
>
>  [Image]

Post a reply to this message

> Nice one.
> One comment : You should play with the confidence and variance
value for
> the focal_blur . ( Confidence with something like 0.999999 and
variance
> with 1/1000000). It is going to take longer to render but the
sphere in
> the background will look better.
>

The sphere is in the very near foreground (can you see shadows of
here [is 'sphere' female in english too ??? in german it is ...]
on the plane???) and I did use very high confidence/variance
values. As you can see there is no "dithering-like"-pattern in
the sphere... the sphere is completely soft, as it should be ...
But, of course I used a camera-aperature of 3.0 ... the highest
value, moray allowed me to set directly..

--

 ,',    Jan Walzer      \V/  http://wa.lzer.net     ,',
',','   student of      >|<  mailto:jan### [at] lzernet ',','
  '   ComputerScience   /A\  +49-177-7403863         '

Post a reply to this message

What I meant is that you can see 'jagged' lines of the sphere as though
there are three or four semi transparent which are a bit larger than the
actual one.
I am sorry to contradict you, but the sphere is not as smooth as it can
be.
Maybe it is onely the JPEG artifacts.







> > Nice one.
> > One comment : You should play with the confidence and variance
> value for
> > the focal_blur . ( Confidence with something like 0.999999 and
> variance
> > with 1/1000000). It is going to take longer to render but the
> sphere in
> > the background will look better.
> >

> The sphere is in the very near foreground (can you see shadows of
> here [is 'sphere' female in english too ??? in german it is ...]
> on the plane???) and I did use very high confidence/variance
> values. As you can see there is no "dithering-like"-pattern in
> the sphere... the sphere is completely soft, as it should be ...
> But, of course I used a camera-aperature of 3.0 ... the highest
> value, moray allowed me to set directly..
>
> --
>
>  ,',    Jan Walzer      \V/  http://wa.lzer.net     ,',
> ',','   student of      >|<  mailto:jan### [at] lzernet ',','
>   '   ComputerScience   /A\  +49-177-7403863         '

Post a reply to this message

Very cool... I love images with focal blur.

-Doug Eichenberg

Post a reply to this message

Sphere's are not female nor male... I think in the English language boats
are the only objects inherently female.
Is the sphere a boat? if it is then it is a female :-)

--

Ian

Inkwell: Ian's Homepage
http://www.topcities.com/cartoon/inkwell/index.htm

> The sphere is in the very near foreground (can you see shadows of
> here [is 'sphere' female in english too ??? in german it is ...]

Post a reply to this message

Simple yet unique.  I like it.  Seems to have a fogginess along with the
blurring, ground fog perhaps?  And most interesting are the reflections in the
sphere and box which also show the non-blurred and blurred parts of the
checker floor.  One of the best focal blurs I've seen done too, not sure what
Fabien H. is seeing.

Bob

Post a reply to this message

Ian Witham wrote:
> 
> Sphere's are not female nor male... I think in the English language boats
> are the only objects inherently female.

If you talk to a sailor, boats, the sea, storms and even whales will
have the feminine gender.  

-- 
Francois Labreque | Unfortunately, there's no such thing as a snooze
     flabreq      | button on a cat who wants breakfast.
        @         |      - Unattributed quote from rec.humor.funny
  attglobal.net

Post a reply to this message

Francois Labreque wrote:
>
> Ian Witham wrote:
> >
> > Sphere's are not female nor male... I think in the English language
boats
> > are the only objects inherently female.
>
> If you talk to a sailor, boats, the sea, storms and even whales will
> have the feminine gender.

Yes, traditionally sailors are lonely, lonely men :)

Post a reply to this message

juxtaposition - doh!

There is a point at which higher confidence is only a hindrance. This render
came off well enough. :)

Fabien is right, though. IMHO you might very well change your 'vision' (of
the image) if you rendered with higher confidence. When I get to playing
with such things my images take on entirely new headings, and some of the
mistakes are the best ones! :)

Grim

Post a reply to this message