second version, 

I increased resolution of the ice heightfield, and changed textures for water
and ice, looks much *colder*, doesn't it ?

The ice is with transparency, no media, the water is RMF now, with transparency
too and angle dependant reflection.  

I did not yet work on the sky, it looks more like overcast weather now, so i
should add some clouds...

I also tried radiosity, but it did not change anything :-( is there any tutorial
on outside radiosity?

Comments still welcome, 

Christoph

--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'arctic_02.jpg' (101 KB)

Preview of image 'arctic_02.jpg'

This is really coming along.  I would think twice before changing
anything (and make sure you keep a snapshot of your source as
of right now because I think you will want to come back to it :-)

In particular I would not change the sky.  I live in Canada and I
can tell you that cold days are normally cloud-free.  In fact if you
add some clouds I bet your scene will feel "warmer".

Perfect just the way it is!

"Christoph Hormann" <Chr### [at] schunteretctu-bsde> wrote in
message news:397C9F3C.D3A126AE@schunter.etc.tu-bs.de...
>
> second version,
>
> I increased resolution of the ice heightfield, and changed textures for
water
> and ice, looks much *colder*, doesn't it ?
>
> The ice is with transparency, no media, the water is RMF now, with
transparency
> too and angle dependant reflection.
>
> I did not yet work on the sky, it looks more like overcast weather now, so
i
> should add some clouds...
>
> I also tried radiosity, but it did not change anything :-( is there any
tutorial
> on outside radiosity?
>
> Comments still welcome,
>
> Christoph
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
> Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

In article <397C9F3C.D3A126AE@schunter.etc.tu-bs.de>, 
chr### [at] gmxde wrote:

> I increased resolution of the ice heightfield, and changed textures 
> for water and ice, looks much *colder*, doesn't it ?
> 
> The ice is with transparency, no media, the water is RMF now, with 
> transparency too and angle dependant reflection.  

It looks great now! Like a photo...and I only see one "spike" of ice, 
and that one looks like it is connected to a floe, which would explain 
why it doesn't tip over.


> I did not yet work on the sky, it looks more like overcast weather 
> now, so i should add some clouds...

I agree, some clouds would help. Or just change to color of the sky to a 
medium blue-gray, like an even cover of clouds.


> I also tried radiosity, but it did not change anything :-( is there 
> any tutorial on outside radiosity?

Did you remember to turn it on? Simply specifying the radiosity options 
in global_settings isn't enough.

-- 
Christopher James Huff - Personal e-mail: chr### [at] maccom
TAG(Technical Assistance Group) e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
Personal Web page: http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG Web page: http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message

Spock wrote:
> 
> This is really coming along.  I would think twice before changing
> anything (and make sure you keep a snapshot of your source as
> of right now because I think you will want to come back to it :-)
> 

Already to late :-) But honestly, if I would document every change, I would
never come along.

> In particular I would not change the sky.  I live in Canada and I
> can tell you that cold days are normally cloud-free.  In fact if you
> add some clouds I bet your scene will feel "warmer".
> 
> Perfect just the way it is!
> 

Thanks, I never thought about a sky totally covered by clouds, but NTL, i think
it needs at least a bit of structure and some dust on the lower part.

Christoph

--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

Chris Huff wrote:
> 
> 
> It looks great now! Like a photo...and I only see one "spike" of ice,
> and that one looks like it is connected to a floe, which would explain
> why it doesn't tip over.
>

Did I miss one :-) In fact they disappeared accidently, I don't really know what
change was responsible.
 
[...]
> 
> > I also tried radiosity, but it did not change anything :-( is there
> > any tutorial on outside radiosity?
> 
> Did you remember to turn it on? Simply specifying the radiosity options
> in global_settings isn't enough.
> 

You are right, forgot +QR, even though, program output is a bit irritationg: the
megapov/official incompatibility warning for radiosity also appears, when it's
switched off... 

Christoph

--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

Christoph Hormann wrote:
> I also tried radiosity, but it did not change anything :-( is there any tutorial
> on outside radiosity?

See the dome image as an example what to expect from radiosity.
news://news.povray.org/3947AB86.1450F605%40kivisalo.net

K.K.

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 23:27:20 +0200 Christoph Hormann
<Chr### [at] schunteretctu-bsde> wrote:

>You are right, forgot +QR, even though, program output is a bit irritationg: the
>megapov/official incompatibility warning for radiosity also appears, when it's
>switched off...

  Hi, Christoph. Any time radiosity is specified in the global_settings
block, you will receive the 'experimental feature' warning, whether or
not you've actually turned on the radiosity feature during the render.

-- 
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

Whoa, this is very good scenery.  I like the snow-atop-ice look of the
bergs.  The water could still use a clear pigment with 'interior
{fade_color}' to do the filtering.

Bob

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 23:15:51 +0200, Christoph Hormann
<Chr### [at] schunteretctu-bsde> wrote:

>Thanks, I never thought about a sky totally covered by clouds, but NTL, i think
>it needs at least a bit of structure and some dust on the lower part.

Nay, just make it bluish and getting lighter along te vertical.


Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] usanet
TAG      e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:55:40 +0200, Christoph Hormann
<Chr### [at] schunteretctu-bsde> wrote:

>Comments still welcome, 

Stunningly realistic!


Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] usanet
TAG      e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message