 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris Huff wrote:
>
> Or maybe the cooling maser for a SunDiver ship...
>
If "SunDiver ship" is a beer I would agree ;-)
Karl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Comments?
I like it a lot.. I really like the texture on the glowing tube things.
> If you can guess what this devices does, tell me.
My guess:
I think it was an early design or Denver International Airport (before they
decided on Kevlar tent things). This design was rejected because people
could STILL find there way around.
A friend of mine thinks it's the spaceship from the T.V. Series, "V".
-autowitch
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <39E724D2.B705DF57@t-online.de>, Karl Pelzer
<Kar### [at] t-online de> wrote:
> If "SunDiver ship" is a beer I would agree ;-)
Actually, it is a big, mirrored spherical spaceship with a 2 sided deck
dividing it in half, built to poke around the sun. It used a big maser
to remove excess heat.
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> If you can guess what this devices does, tell me.
It's a testing rig for star trek warp engines(matter/antimatter
reaction chamber).
> Rendered at "desktop size" 1280x1024. Comments?
I'll have to resize it to 1024x768 for my desktop. :)
--
Phil
...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hello,
Nice Picture!
> If you can guess what this devices does, tell me.
The Tube in the middle with that wires looks like a particle accelerator.
The rings around it wohld then be magnets that direct the particle
stream.
But its no ordinary particle accelerator, because it's no circuit, it's
straight and it ends somewhere in the blackness (space?)
That blue-glowing thingies are cooling-tubes I guess.
I don't really know what those quadratic plates at the outside are
supposed to do... look like some kind of mirrors, perhaps to reflect
harmful radiation back to the inside?
After all I think it must some kind of orbital weapon.
Lutz-Peter
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Clute wrote:
> > Rendered at "desktop size" 1280x1024. Comments?
>
> I'll have to resize it to 1024x768 for my desktop. :)
I had to resize it to 1152x864. Nobody uses that so I resize everything.
No prob.
Thing is, 1280x1024 is not 3:4, that's why I think it is the evil
resolution... fortunately PhotoDeluxe let's me use aa when resizing even
if i don't constrain proportions. PP7 doesn't let me aa unless i
maintain aspect ratio. </rant>
It works great for wpaper!
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
> Steven Pigeon wrote:
> >
> > A nice little scene, about 100,000 frame level objects,
> > about 5000 light sources, took 29d 15h to render on a 233 Pentium 2.
> >
> > All the wires are in fact Hermite Splines.
> >
>
> I looks good, but 29 days is quite a lot for such a scene.
>
> I wonder how it would look like without the light sources just using radiosity.
> Of course it would be much different but maybe not bad after all and probably at
> least a bit faster.
It uses both radiosity (trace level=2, Q11) and an awful lot of lightsources. I had
to disable lightbuffers, because otherwise it asks for about 800 Megs of light
buffer
memory. eh.
Best,
S.
----------------------------------------------------------
Steven Pigeon Ph. D. Student.
University of Montreal.
pig### [at] iroumontrealca Topics: data compression,
pig### [at] jspumontrealca signal processing,
ste### [at] researchattcom non stationnary signals
and wavelets.
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pigeon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bob H." wrote:
> That may be the longest render I've seen stated, think the next to the
> longest was 27 days maybe. As far as being a continuous render though I
> don't know; and you didn't say if yours was.
Yes, continuous. I have UPSes on all my computers. It makes them live longer,
not eating the polluted electricity from HydroQuebec. And you can have something
run for months. Actually, I run NT (not 98 or WinMe).
Best,
S.
----------------------------------------------------------
Steven Pigeon Ph. D. Student.
University of Montreal.
pig### [at] iroumontrealca Topics: data compression,
pig### [at] jspumontrealca signal processing,
ste### [at] researchattcom non stationnary signals
and wavelets.
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pigeon
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
>
> Phil Clute wrote:
>
> > > Rendered at "desktop size" 1280x1024. Comments?
> >
> > I'll have to resize it to 1024x768 for my desktop. :)
>
> I had to resize it to 1152x864. Nobody uses that so I resize everything.
Well, I do use that resolution too :) And if I manage to finish that
damned render, it will be at 1154x864...
--
* Abandon the search for truth, * mailto:ber### [at] inamecom
* Settle for a good fantasy. * http://www.enst.fr/~jberger
*********************************
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Wicked cool! It's now my desktop at work.
Pete
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
