Margus Ramst wrote:
> 
> Wonderful landscape. Too bad about the render time, but I guess it is to be
> expected with this much of topological detail.

Thanks, that about sums it up: the more detail, the more time it takes, the only
nice thing is that it does not need much memory.

> I haven't seen such formations first-hand and can't comment on the realism. The
> mesa (?) seem to made of some sedimentary rock like sandstone, aren't they
> usually made of harder rocks like granite? But I really don't know, and it looks
> good as is.
> 

I think you are right about the type of stone, granite would probably need some
additional sharp medium scale structure, but i think there are quite a lot of
sandstone formations like this.

Christoph

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

Post a reply to this message

absolutely great! Think i have to try out to work with isosurfaces. Unfortunately,
Moray dosen`t support Megapov at this moment .-(. So i have to change  code by hand.

Christoph Hormann schrieb:

> No finished work at all, I'm still not content with the textures and some other
> things, for example the upper parts of the mountains.
>
> It's just one isosurface, it's *really* slow, this render took 11 hours.
>
> For speed reasons i set the accuracy-value of the isosurface quite high (0.005),
> and therefore it looks a bit smooth.
>
> And of course comments are welcome.
>
> Christoph
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
> Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  [Image]

Post a reply to this message

I've been planning on doing something like this, maybe I'll not bother, this
is amazing.

Kev

Post a reply to this message

Margus Ramst wrote in message <39A### [at] peakeduee>...
>I haven't seen such formations first-hand and can't comment on the realism.
The
>mesa (?) seem to made of some sedimentary rock like sandstone, aren't they
>usually made of harder rocks like granite? But I really don't know, and it
looks
>good as is.


Having just returned from a vacation to the southwestern United States, I
can definitively state that the real thing is far more impressive.  The only
major problem with this picture is that the striping on the cliffs is too
regular.

As for the rocks, the rock formations in the southwest are formed almost
exclusively from sandstone and other sedimentary rocks.  Granite is usually
found only in the bottommost layers of the formations.

Mark

Post a reply to this message

Mark Wagner wrote:
> 
> Having just returned from a vacation to the southwestern United States, I
> can definitively state that the real thing is far more impressive.  

Sure it is, especially at this tiny size. Who am I to compete with reality ...

> The only
> major problem with this picture is that the striping on the cliffs is too
> regular.
> 

Now that you say it... 
Although IMO the straight stripes themselves are quite right, but they should be
interrupted by some other structures.  

Christoph

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

Post a reply to this message

I think the ground level could look a little more grainy or sandy...  Light
traces of water and wet ground will appeal to tae eye as well... Looks great
almost picture perfect... =)

Christoph Hormann wrote:

> Steve wrote:
> >
> > This is interesting, but it's crying out for a bit of water and some
> > sparce vegetation.
> >
>
> I agree about the vegetation, just not that easy to include it in the
> isosurface, adding it as seperate objects via trace does not seem that elegant
> to me :-)
>
> Christoph
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
> Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

> 
> absolutely great! Think i have to try out to work with isosurfaces. Unfortunately,
> Moray dosen`t support Megapov at this moment .-(. So i have to change  code by hand.
> 

Thanks, 
including isosurface support in moray would be quite difficult because you have
to display them somehow.  

Christoph

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

Post a reply to this message

SomeGuy wrote:
> 
> I think the ground level could look a little more grainy or sandy...  Light
> traces of water and wet ground will appeal to tae eye as well... Looks great
> almost picture perfect... =)
> 

Thanks, i already consider some more graininess, I'm still not sure whether
water is a good idea, but maybe i will give it a try.   

Christoph

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

Post a reply to this message

Christoph Hormann wrote in message
<39ACC829.D4315EE9@schunter.etc.tu-bs.de>...

>Although IMO the straight stripes themselves are quite right, but they
should be
>interrupted by some other structures.


Narrow stripes are usually associated with softer sandstone and relatively
shallow slopes.  Broad stripes are usually associated with harder sandstone
and vertical cliffs.  The stripes are fairly straight, and in a canyon like
this one, are horizontal.  In the mountains, the stripes will be bent,
folded, and tilted in funny directions.

Mark

Post a reply to this message

Mark Wagner wrote:
> 
> Narrow stripes are usually associated with softer sandstone and relatively
> shallow slopes.  Broad stripes are usually associated with harder sandstone
> and vertical cliffs.  The stripes are fairly straight, and in a canyon like
> this one, are horizontal.  In the mountains, the stripes will be bent,
> folded, and tilted in funny directions.
> 
> Mark

Sounds quite logical, even though most structures like this seem to have a lot
of vertical interruptions in the stripes.  

I already made the structures broader and it looks better, but i did not yet
manage to get some good irregularity.  

Christoph

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

Post a reply to this message