 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Went astray from the original intent but came out halfway decent IMO. So
maybe the ground is a little bumpy and the trees and clouds are totally
fake... but it's better than a checkered floor. :)
Sponge is an isosurface! :))) Ground is too.
Render time 6:41:27 (PIII450) peak mem 104206324 (this all comes from
the trees)
Comments? Comment! heh
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricy net> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'menger.jpg' (137 KB)
Preview of image 'menger.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Grrrrreat !!!
Making it with an isosurface is a truly great idea, since it solves
the memory problem very elegantly. And the scene setup is nice too...
Could we have a look at the source ?
Fabien.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Add a parking lot and folks with briefcases; like they're going to a
menger sponge office building. :)
--
Phil
...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
>
> Comments? Comment! heh
>
I like the scenery and the colors very much, a closeup view from just above the
surface would be nice...
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Very nice, I like the feel of the whole thing. You've got the sky just
right. Intrigued by the trees, how were they done?
All it needs now is a few million blades of grass!
Mick
"Christoph Hormann" <Chr### [at] schunteretctu-bsde> wrote in
message news:39F14585.7F5EFBBA@schunter.etc.tu-bs.de...
>
>
> David Fontaine wrote:
> >
> > Comments? Comment! heh
> >
>
> I like the scenery and the colors very much, a closeup view from just
above the
> surface would be nice...
>
> Christoph
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
> Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I love the idea.
im working on a menger animation
and using an iso might just help me making it better
thanks for the creativity!
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote in message
news:39F12B96.CD8ED61F@faricy.net...
> Went astray from the original intent but came out halfway decent IMO. So
> maybe the ground is a little bumpy and the trees and clouds are totally
> fake... but it's better than a checkered floor. :)
>
> Sponge is an isosurface! :))) Ground is too.
>
> Render time 6:41:27 (PIII450) peak mem 104206324 (this all comes from
> the trees)
>
> Comments? Comment! heh
>
> --
> David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
> My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 00:37:26 -0500, David Fontaine wrote:
>Went astray from the original intent but came out halfway decent IMO. So
Don't they all?
It looks really good, like the kind of thing you'd see in a TV advert
for one of those new towns designed for cars.
--
Cheers
Steve email mailto:ste### [at] zeroppsuklinuxnet
%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps.
web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/
or http://start.at/zero-pps
12:45pm up 10 days, 14:05, 2 users, load average: 1.79, 1.37, 1.28
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"David Fontaine" <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote :
>
> Sponge is an isosurface! :))) Ground is too.
Isosurface!?! What? Little isosurface cubes stuck together? If you have
made it all of one isosurface, you really need to source us before our heads
explode.
...please....
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Render time 6:41:27 (PIII450) peak mem 104206324 (this all comes from
> the trees)
i take it this means a fly thtough animation is out then :)
Rick
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill DeWitt wrote:
>
> Isosurface!?! What? Little isosurface cubes stuck together?
No. It's a combination of triangle waves functions at multiple
frequencies. Simple but ingenious idea, nonetheless.
Fabien.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Fabien Mosen" <fab### [at] skynetbe> wrote in message
news:39F19A38.1868E5DD@skynet.be...
> Bill DeWitt wrote:
> >
> > Isosurface!?! What? Little isosurface cubes stuck together?
>
> No. It's a combination of triangle waves functions at multiple
> frequencies. Simple but ingenious idea, nonetheless.
I sort of knew it wasn't little blocks stuck together, but I was hoping
that it was done with a fractal formula and that we could modify it to
develop other fractal shapes.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hey it's pretty good. If the sponge were a little smaller and the trees a
little larger, i can picture it as some sort of hidden ruin of an ancient
civilization. There's no hidding this one though :)
I can also see some small woodland creatures taking up living arrangements
in it.
What was the original intent?
peace,
ross
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote in message
news:39F12B96.CD8ED61F@faricy.net...
> Went astray from the original intent but came out halfway decent IMO. So
> maybe the ground is a little bumpy and the trees and clouds are totally
> fake... but it's better than a checkered floor. :)
>
> Sponge is an isosurface! :))) Ground is too.
>
> Render time 6:41:27 (PIII450) peak mem 104206324 (this all comes from
> the trees)
>
> Comments? Comment! heh
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill DeWitt wrote:
> I sort of knew it wasn't little blocks stuck together, but I was hoping
> that it was done with a fractal formula and that we could modify it to
> develop other fractal shapes.
It probably can be made that way, if you generate the formula with
a recursive algorithm (sort of lsystem, maybe ?).
#declare formula = {
#while loop..
#declare frequency = frequency*2;
+ sub_formula_using_frequency_as_a_parameter
#increment loop..
#end loop.
}
Fabien.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Pretty nice!
It feels like a fractal isosurface of some sort!
I gotta get a hand on those isosurfaces, I still have only povray!
--
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+
| Simon Lemieux | Website : http://www.666Mhz.net |
| Email : Sin### [at] 666Mhznet | POV-Ray, OpenGL, C++ and more... |
+-------------------------+----------------------------------+
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Clute wrote:
> Add a parking lot and folks with briefcases; like they're going to a
> menger sponge office building. :)
That was the plan, but it would multiply the amount of work already put
into it about tenfold... I s'pose blob-men would be great, but no cars!
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mick Hazelgrove wrote:
> Very nice, I like the feel of the whole thing. You've got the sky just
> right. Intrigued by the trees, how were they done?
They're my age-old macro... look very strange with no leaves, like in my
"grotesque".
> All it needs now is a few million blades of grass!
heheh
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill DeWitt wrote:
> "David Fontaine" <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote :
> >
> > Sponge is an isosurface! :))) Ground is too.
>
> Isosurface!?! What? Little isosurface cubes stuck together? If you have
> made it all of one isosurface, you really need to source us before our heads
> explode.
:))))) I will
each axis is made of a bunch of nested if(,,), and the three are intersected
using &.
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Rick [Kitty5]" wrote:
> > Render time 6:41:27 (PIII450) peak mem 104206324 (this all comes from
> > the trees)
>
> i take it this means a fly thtough animation is out then :)
maybe if I ditch the trees and turn down max_trace_level from 100 <G>
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill DeWitt wrote:
> I sort of knew it wasn't little blocks stuck together, but I was hoping
> that it was done with a fractal formula and that we could modify it to
> develop other fractal shapes.
You can do this in isosurface? cool
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ross Litscher wrote:
> What was the original intent?
Office building. But that requires more landscaping than I was willing to put
in at the moment. :)
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Source will be in p.b.s-f shortly. :)
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Fabien Mosen wrote:
> > Isosurface!?! What? Little isosurface cubes stuck together?
>
> No. It's a combination of triangle waves functions at multiple
> frequencies. Simple but ingenious idea, nonetheless.
Thanks!
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"David Fontaine" <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote in message
news:39F1FAEB.3A0DE10D@faricy.net...
> Bill DeWitt wrote:
>
> > I sort of knew it wasn't little blocks stuck together, but I was
hoping
> > that it was done with a fractal formula and that we could modify it to
> > develop other fractal shapes.
>
> You can do this in isosurface? cool
Uh... don't ask me, I was hoping you knew.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> Went astray from the original intent but came out halfway decent IMO. So
> maybe the ground is a little bumpy and the trees and clouds are totally
> fake... but it's better than a checkered floor. :)
>
> Sponge is an isosurface! :))) Ground is too.
> ...
Very nice. Smart solution.
Now lets have a look inside it !
Can you show us a room with a view ? ;-)
Tor Olav
--
mailto:tor### [at] hotmailcom
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok/tokrays.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It should be fun to jump around inside it. But it may be hard to climb any
stairs that may be in it when it rains. It looks like it's reflective. Is
the reflective surface supposed to be a glassy covering, and not part of the
sponge? Sponges have rounder pores but I guess that they can not be seen
because they would be too small and because they are not there.
Brendan
David Fontaine wrote:
> Went astray from the original intent but came out halfway decent IMO. So
> maybe the ground is a little bumpy and the trees and clouds are totally
> fake... but it's better than a checkered floor. :)
>
> Sponge is an isosurface! :))) Ground is too.
>
> Render time 6:41:27 (PIII450) peak mem 104206324 (this all comes from
> the trees)
>
> Comments? Comment! heh
>
> --
> David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
> My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [Image]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Andrea Ryan wrote:
> It should be fun to jump around inside it. But it may be hard to climb any
> stairs that may be in it when it rains. It looks like it's reflective. Is
> the reflective surface supposed to be a glassy covering, and not part of the
> sponge? Sponges have rounder pores but I guess that they can not be seen
> because they would be too small and because they are not there.
> Brendan
Sponge only refers to the fractaline shape.
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tor Olav Kristensen wrote:
> Very nice. Smart solution.
Thanks!
> Can you show us a room with a view ? ;-)
Yes but won't ;-)
I'd have to model it first...
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> Render time 6:41:27 (PIII450) peak mem 104206324 (this all comes from
> the trees)
>
> Comments? Comment! heh
You want a comment ? Ok. I decided to try rendering this on my new
system - AMD Athlon 950, 600x800 aa 0.3. I roughly expected to cut
your PIII 450 time in half. Imagine my surprise !
Wheeeeeee.....
Peak memory used: 104187967 bytes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time For Parse: 0 hours 0 minutes 26.0 seconds (26 seconds)
Time For Trace: 1 hours 7 minutes 14.0 seconds (4034 seconds)
Total Time: 1 hours 7 minutes 40.0 seconds (4060 seconds)
Oh, nice image by the way.
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
> David Fontaine wrote:
>
> > Render time 6:41:27 (PIII450) peak mem 104206324 (this all comes from
> > the trees)
> >
> > Comments? Comment! heh
>
> You want a comment ? Ok. I decided to try rendering this on my new
> system - AMD Athlon 950, 600x800 aa 0.3. I roughly expected to cut
> your PIII 450 time in half. Imagine my surprise !
>
> Wheeeeeee.....
>
> Total Time: 1 hours 7 minutes 40.0 seconds (4060 seconds)
Except I used aa0.2. Oops, try again!
> Oh, nice image by the way.
Tanx!
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> > Total Time: 1 hours 7 minutes 40.0 seconds (4060 seconds)
>
> Except I used aa0.2. Oops, try again!
It might add another 10-15 min.. Still like 5 times faster. Wheeee.....
> > Oh, nice image by the way.
>
> Tanx!
Your welcome.
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
> > Except I used aa0.2. Oops, try again!
>
> It might add another 10-15 min.. Still like 5 times faster. Wheeee.....
I find a small change in aa can really affect time sometimes...
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
> David Fontaine wrote:
>
> > > Total Time: 1 hours 7 minutes 40.0 seconds (4060 seconds)
> >
> > Except I used aa0.2. Oops, try again!
>
> It might add another 10-15 min.. Still like 5 times faster. Wheeee.....
Oh, whoops! I rendered it at 1152x864 too and scaled it down for posting.
Stupid me!
okay, try +H1152 +W864 +aa0.2 and see what the real comparison is!
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> okay, try +H1152 +W864 +aa0.2 and see what the real comparison is!
Well that leveled the playing field a bit.
Peak memory used: 104202751 bytes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time For Parse: 0 hours 0 minutes 24.0 seconds (24 seconds)
Time For Trace: 2 hours 48 minutes 39.0 seconds (10119 seconds)
Total Time: 2 hours 49 minutes 3.0 seconds (10143 seconds)
Hmmm let me calculate this... 2.37 times faster.
Still a good advantage. Wheeeee....
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 00:17:04 -0700, Ken wrote:
>
>
>David Fontaine wrote:
>
>> okay, try +H1152 +W864 +aa0.2 and see what the real comparison is!
>
>Well that leveled the playing field a bit.
>
>Peak memory used: 104202751 bytes
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Time For Parse: 0 hours 0 minutes 24.0 seconds (24 seconds)
>Time For Trace: 2 hours 48 minutes 39.0 seconds (10119 seconds)
> Total Time: 2 hours 49 minutes 3.0 seconds (10143 seconds)
>
>Hmmm let me calculate this... 2.37 times faster.
>Still a good advantage. Wheeeee....
Just think in a years time your machine will seem kind of slow compared
to what's on the market, and what a few other people round here will
already have. You'll get used to the speed fairly soon, so it won't
seem fast any more anyway, you're just going through the honeymoon
period.
--
Cheers
Steve email mailto:ste### [at] zeroppsuklinuxnet
%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps.
web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/
or http://start.at/zero-pps
5:36pm up 16 days, 18:56, 3 users, load average: 1.09, 1.04, 1.01
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken wrote:
> Hmmm let me calculate this... 2.37 times faster.
> Still a good advantage. Wheeeee....
>:|
I want one!
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Steve wrote:
> Just think in a years time your machine will seem kind of slow compared
> to what's on the market, and what a few other people round here will
> already have. You'll get used to the speed fairly soon, so it won't
> seem fast any more anyway, you're just going through the honeymoon
> period.
But it's nice to have my moment in the sun...
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
>
> Ken wrote:
>
> > Hmmm let me calculate this... 2.37 times faster.
> > Still a good advantage. Wheeeee....
>
> >:|
> I want one!
You can have mine..............................for a price :)
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ken" <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote :
>
> But it's nice to have my moment in the sun...
>
I was just at the Zoo (doing the "Boo at the Zoo" thing) and GateWay had
a table out there. I asked them about how much my $3000 1.5 year old system
would get me on their "Your way" system where you can trade in your system
for the newer technology...
$300
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill DeWitt wrote:
>
> "Ken" <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote :
> >
> > But it's nice to have my moment in the sun...
> >
>
> I was just at the Zoo (doing the "Boo at the Zoo" thing) and GateWay had
> a table out there. I asked them about how much my $3000 1.5 year old system
> would get me on their "Your way" system where you can trade in your system
> for the newer technology...
>
> $300
If you shop carefully you might be able to get a 750 athlon processor
for that price but you would still need to buy a MB and memory to
support it and those aren't cheap either. I've spent around $800
for my current set up and see another $250 expenses coming in the
near future to get more memory and a larger HD <sigh>. Throw enough
money around and you eventually get what you want.
--
Ken Tyler - 1400+ POV-Ray, Graphics, 3D Rendering, and Raytracing Links:
http://home.pacbell.net/tylereng/index.html http://www.povray.org/links/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ken" <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote :
>
> If you shop carefully you might be able to get a 750 athlon processor
> for that price
I'll struggle on like I am for a while. If I can avoid hearing too many
stories like yours, I should be able to hold out until the 1 gig's are
selling for something I can afford.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
