 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Just something that I thought up while watching
TV the other week. There are no light sources in this
scene. Each candle flame is made up of two glows.
Radiosity settings were based on a post by Gilles Tran
and adjusted until the picture looked good
Render time : 4 hrs 5 min on a PIII 450.
Gail
--
********************************************************************
* gsh### [at] monotix coza * System.dat not found. *
* http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~gail/ * Reformat hard drive Y)es O)k *
********************************************************************
* If at first you don't succeed, call it version 1.0 *
********************************************************************
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'Church.jpg' (50 KB)
Preview of image 'Church.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nice warm look to it.
Odd shadow at the back, lower left. Doesn't seem to relate to anything.
Also some strange places around the windows, among other things. Was
error_bound way down? <0.3, or not?
Only just this morning I tried radiosity with glows in the scene but I left
the lights so I couldn't be sure of any differences. I'll have to give the
glow-only thing a try too.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bob Hughes <per### [at] aolcom?subject=PoV-News:> wrote in message
news:39d86047@news.povray.org...
> Nice warm look to it.
> Odd shadow at the back, lower left. Doesn't seem to relate to anything.
I noticed that while it was rendering. Haven't a clue where that could be
coming from
There's also a shadow on the left wall with no source that I can tell.
> Also some strange places around the windows, among other things. Was
> error_bound way down? <0.3, or not?
Error bound was 1. I'm not too familiar with radiosity so I tweaked til it
looked good.
> Only just this morning I tried radiosity with glows in the scene but I
left
> the lights so I couldn't be sure of any differences. I'll have to give
the
> glow-only thing a try too.
>
I had a light source for quite a while, but removed it as it didn't help
the feel of the scene.
Gail
--
********************************************************************
* gsh### [at] monotixcoza * System.dat not found. *
* http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~gail/ * Reformat hard drive Y)es O)k *
********************************************************************
* If at first you don't succeed, call it version 1.0 *
********************************************************************
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail Shaw <gsh### [at] monotixcoza> wrote in message
news:39d85dd4@news.povray.org...
> Just something that I thought up while watching
> TV the other week. There are no light sources in this
> scene. Each candle flame is made up of two glows.
>
The glass in the windows has a bumps normal. I was trying
for an old glass look. Think I'll remove the normal as it looks wierd.
Gail
--
********************************************************************
* gsh### [at] monotixcoza * System.dat not found. *
* http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~gail/ * Reformat hard drive Y)es O)k *
********************************************************************
* If at first you don't succeed, call it version 1.0 *
********************************************************************
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Gail Shaw" <gsh### [at] monotixcoza> wrote in message
news:39d86528@news.povray.org...
>
> Bob Hughes <per### [at] aolcom?subject=PoV-News:> wrote in message
> news:39d86047@news.povray.org...
> > Nice warm look to it.
> > Odd shadow at the back, lower left. Doesn't seem to relate to anything.
>
> I noticed that while it was rendering. Haven't a clue where that could be
> coming from
> There's also a shadow on the left wall with no source that I can tell.
>
I could well be wrong, but the odd shadows seem to be cast by the candles
themselves - the upper tiers of candles would appear to be blocking light
from the lower tiers - do glows block light from other glows and/or lights?
The artifacts around the windows are peculiar - is there any part of the CSG
operation that made the windows that is the same shape as the rectangular
artifacts?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Gail Shaw" <gsh### [at] monotixcoza> wrote in message
news:39d86528@news.povray.org...
|
| Bob Hughes <per### [at] aolcom?subject=PoV-News:> wrote in message
| news:39d86047@news.povray.org...
|
| > Also some strange places around the windows, among other things. Was
| > error_bound way down? <0.3, or not?
|
| Error bound was 1. I'm not too familiar with radiosity so I tweaked til it
| looked good.
Oh wow, hey, try error_bound 0.1, or even less and use pretrace_start and
_end of 1. It might do well.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tom Melly <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote in message
news:39d8692b@news.povray.org...
>
> I could well be wrong, but the odd shadows seem to be cast by the candles
> themselves - the upper tiers of candles would appear to be blocking light
> from the lower tiers - do glows block light from other glows and/or
lights?
Possibly, but the shadows are solid (looks like an invisible box is casting
shadows)
> The artifacts around the windows are peculiar - is there any part of the
CSG
> operation that made the windows that is the same shape as the rectangular
> artifacts?
Might be from the bumps normal, and the candles on the right.
Gail
--
********************************************************************
* gsh### [at] monotixcoza * System.dat not found. *
* http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~gail/ * Reformat hard drive Y)es O)k *
********************************************************************
* If at first you don't succeed, call it version 1.0 *
********************************************************************
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail Shaw wrote:
>
> Just something that I thought up while watching
> TV the other week. There are no light sources in this
> scene. Each candle flame is made up of two glows.
>
> Radiosity settings were based on a post by Gilles Tran
> and adjusted until the picture looked good
>
> Render time : 4 hrs 5 min on a PIII 450.
>
I like it but IMO the candles are not bright enough in relation to the
walls/floor/etc. if the room is only lighted by the candles.
As Bob mentioned you should also try reducing error_bound.
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Gail Shaw" <gsh### [at] monotixcoza> wrote in message
news:39d86b41@news.povray.org...
>
> Tom Melly <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote in message
> news:39d8692b@news.povray.org...
> >
> > I could well be wrong, but the odd shadows seem to be cast by the
candles
> > themselves - the upper tiers of candles would appear to be blocking
light
> > from the lower tiers - do glows block light from other glows and/or
> lights?
>
> Possibly, but the shadows are solid (looks like an invisible box is
casting
> shadows)
To me it looks more like there is a band of -extra- light that covers
the upper half of the windows.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Bob Hughes
Subject: Re: Glows and radiosity (testing123 ~8.5K jpg]
Date: 2 Oct 2000 09:19:05
Message: <39d88b49@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Christoph Hormann" <Chr### [at] schunteretctu-bsde> wrote in
message news:39D8707E.E88174E1@schunter.etc.tu-bs.de...
|
| As Bob mentioned you should also try reducing error_bound.
It might not matter. So far I've only succeeded in making a more or less
refined blotchiness. Similar to photons it seems to me. Have a look. This
rendering used error_bound 0.2 and at 0.1 the artifacts become better
defined spots, looking much like individual glows scattered all over the
object (alien character) on the sides facing the glows. I used a white glow
off camera to mimic a regular light and it never was enough to make a good
replacement; so this has light sources for both the red and white lights,
dimmed considerably.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'ab36.jpg' (7 KB)
Preview of image 'ab36.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bob Hughes wrote:
>
> It might not matter. So far I've only succeeded in making a more or less
> refined blotchiness. Similar to photons it seems to me. Have a look. This
> rendering used error_bound 0.2 and at 0.1 the artifacts become better
> defined spots, looking much like individual glows scattered all over the
> object (alien character) on the sides facing the glows. I used a white glow
> off camera to mimic a regular light and it never was enough to make a good
> replacement; so this has light sources for both the red and white lights,
> dimmed considerably.
>
> Bob
>
I also made the experience that when working with glows and radiosity, reducing
error_bound does not necessarily remove all artefacts, but at least it changes
things so it is worth trying.
BTW, your alien looks good although it seems somewhat polished :-)
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Bob Hughes
Subject: Re: Glows and radiosity (testing123 ~8.5K jpg]
Date: 2 Oct 2000 10:10:21
Message: <39d8974d@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Christoph Hormann" <Chr### [at] schunteretctu-bsde> wrote in
message news:39D8952E.6B9A216D@schunter.etc.tu-bs.de...
|
| I also made the experience that when working with glows and radiosity,
reducing
| error_bound does not necessarily remove all artefacts, but at least it
changes
| things so it is worth trying.
Okay, good to know others are seeing similar results.
| BTW, your alien looks good although it seems somewhat polished :-)
No, that would be the artifacts alone. However he (it) does have a slight
sheen from being in those hot stage lights all the time.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I love thid, the only thing that looks strange is the
reflections in the windows.
--
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
2:39pm up 3 days, 16:59, 2 users, load average: 2.03, 2.04, 2.08
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
After a second look I think that the shadow at the back is being
caused by the table, try moving it or rendering without it and
see what happens. I know you wouldn't think that it's the table
as it doesn't seem to be in a position where it would cast a
shadow, but strange things can happen.
--
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
2:39pm up 3 days, 16:59, 2 users, load average: 2.03, 2.04, 2.08
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail Shaw wrote:
>
> Just something that I thought up while watching
> TV the other week. There are no light sources in this
> scene. Each candle flame is made up of two glows.
Candles really don't put out that much light. The room should be much
dimmer, IMO.
-Xplo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Candles really don't put out that much light. The room should be much
> dimmer, IMO.
a few candles don't but that many certainly would! try it yourself.
(kids, get your parents' permission before lighting that many candles
and make sure they supervise) :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ryan constantine wrote:
>
> > Candles really don't put out that much light. The room should be much
> > dimmer, IMO.
>
> a few candles don't but that many certainly would!
Nonsense. They'd light their immediate area pretty well, but the overall
illumination is much too bright. Inverse square and all that, you know.
-Xplo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Xplo Eristotle <inq### [at] unforgettablecom> wrote in message
news:39D8ED9D.EAF13679@unforgettable.com...
>
> Candles really don't put out that much light. The room should be much
> dimmer, IMO.
I think I overdid the brightness slightly. Please note however that only
half of the candles in the scene are visible. (there are two rows to the
right of the
camera)
Gail
--
********************************************************************
* gsh### [at] monotixcoza * System.dat not found. *
* http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~gail/ * Reformat hard drive Y)es O)k *
********************************************************************
* If at first you don't succeed, call it version 1.0 *
********************************************************************
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: GrimDude
Subject: Re: Glows and radiosity (testing123 ~8.5K jpg]
Date: 5 Oct 2000 02:55:09
Message: <39dc25cd@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> "Christoph Hormann" <Chr### [at] schunteretctu-bsde> wrote in
> message news:39D8952E.6B9A216D@schunter.etc.tu-bs.de...
> |
> | I also made the experience that when working with glows and radiosity,
> reducing
> | error_bound does not necessarily remove all artefacts, but at least it
> changes
> | things so it is worth trying.
>
> Okay, good to know others are seeing similar results.
>
> | BTW, your alien looks good although it seems somewhat polished :-)
>
> No, that would be the artifacts alone. However he (it) does have a slight
> sheen from being in those hot stage lights all the time.
>
> Bob
>
I think you have to up the recursion limit with a smaller error bound.
Grim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Xplo Eristotle" <inq### [at] unforgettablecom> wrote in message
news:39D95736.CC78C2F0@unforgettable.com...
> Nonsense. They'd light their immediate area pretty well, but the overall
> illumination is much too bright. Inverse square and all that, you know.
>
> -Xplo
Absolutely. More Grimlike, please.
Grim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <39D95736.CC78C2F0@unforgettable.com>,
inq### [at] unforgettablecom wrote:
> Nonsense. They'd light their immediate area pretty well, but the overall
> illumination is much too bright. Inverse square and all that, you know.
Such a large number of candles would still light the area pretty well.
Diffuse lighting would also help. The lighting in this image seems about
right to me.
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I can't say about this particular building (object), but I can say that a
much higher, vaulted ceiling shows variations in shadowing. In real time you
can see shadows flicker just as the candles do. Therefore, I would think the
light should fade a tad as it approaches the ceiling, even here.
I always like Gail's work, of course! :)
Grim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
GrimDude <gri### [at] netzerocom> wrote in message
news:39dfec09@news.povray.org...
> I can't say about this particular building (object), but I can say that a
> much higher, vaulted ceiling shows variations in shadowing. In real time
you
> can see shadows flicker just as the candles do. Therefore, I would think
the
> light should fade a tad as it approaches the ceiling, even here.
I'm re rendering it with the brightness turned down and the recursion
turned up. I think it looks better dimmer.
> I always like Gail's work, of course! :)
Thank you.
Gail
********************************************************************
* gsh### [at] monotixcoza * System.dat not found. *
* http://www.rucus.ru.ac.za/~gail/ * Reformat hard drive Y)es O)k *
********************************************************************
* If at first you don't succeed, call it version 1.0 *
********************************************************************
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
