 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
>L-Systems have the same disadvantages as tree macros (IIRC most tree
>macros are essentially specialized l-systems with some improvements).
Is it mathematically possible to somehow turn a L-system in to a function,
usable for an Isosurface?
What if you create a splines from an L-system, where the splines go from
the startpoint to every endpoint including all intermediate knots on the
path. Use this collection of splines for sweeps of blobs.
Ingo
--
Photography: http://members.home.nl/ingoogni/
Pov-Ray : http://members.home.nl/seed7/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <8FDAB812Aseed7@204.213.191.228>, ing### [at] home nl (ingo)
wrote:
> Is it mathematically possible to somehow turn a L-system in to a
> function, usable for an Isosurface?
Yes, in the same way as for any other object...an L-system simply tells
how to put the pieces together. Your question is a bit like asking if
there is a way to mathematically turn a macro that generates a complex
object file into an isosurface function.
> What if you create a splines from an L-system, where the splines go from
> the startpoint to every endpoint including all intermediate knots on the
> path. Use this collection of splines for sweeps of blobs.
The spline step seems unnecessary, it should be easy to just make blob
components. It shouldn't be extremely difficult to make an include file
that can parse L-systems, at least not for someone who knows how to use
them. I have played around with them a little, but have no idea how the
more complex ones work.
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <39F981BA.7159989D@schunter.etc.tu-bs.de>,
chr### [at] gmxde wrote:
> L-Systems have the same disadvantages as tree macros (IIRC most tree
> macros are essentially specialized l-systems with some improvements).
An L-system patch would process much faster than a macro...the problem
is, what would it be represented as? A union of cones and spheres? A
mesh? A blob or isosurface? A macro can easily be customized to do
whatever you need, but a patch would be too specialized...and there
doesn't seem to be much demand for an L-system macro/include file when
there are macros and include files designed to generate plants and
L-system programs that can output POV-Script.
If you could somehow retrieve data from an L-system patch, like my
particle system patch allows, it would be more useful, but you would
still pay for parsing speed with flexibility.
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <39F9FC96.7564437C@schunter.etc.tu-bs.de>,
chr### [at] gmxde wrote:
> And other than your particle patch the efficiency does not suffer
> that much if you use an external program.
Well, an external program can be a *real* pain when you are doing an
animation or blindly testing parameters. Perhaps a patch would be worth
it, even if it were limited to blob components...
Or maybe the patch could allow you to specify macros to use for creating
each part. That would be the most flexible, but I haven't figured out
how to do it yet. And I don't know much about L-systems anyway, so I
couldn't even begin to attempt one.
--
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'm interested in wickerwork. Did this nit ever get an answer from The
Master?
--John
"Phil Clute" <pcl### [at] tiacnet> wrote in message
news:39F3CA55.698E35C0@tiac.net...
> The basket looks great, nice work!
>
> ...and
> I hate to nit-pick, but I circled some spots that look like they
> might be mistakes. The section in green looks like it might be a
> joining area, possibly you intended this. The sections in red looks
> to me like the horizontal part that's supposed to weave under the
> verticle part is actually going through or on top.
>
> (verticle part, horizontal part-- I guess I'm a little rusty on my
> basket weaving tech lingo)
>
>
> --
> Phil
> ...coffee?...yes please! extra sugar,extra cream...Thank you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: John M Dlugosz
Subject: Re: Basket-weaving (fun with spline objects)
Date: 15 Jan 2001 00:33:59
Message: <3a628bc7@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Chris Colefax" <chr### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:39f3b2ee@news.povray.org...
> Created as a sample for my Spline Macro file
> (http://www.geocities.com/ccolefax/spline), using the built-in spline
> objects (no, they're not sphere sweeps...)
Chris, here is the illustration from the thread on p.a-u.
This is a photo of a basket that I was thinking of.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'P0005175-1.JPG' (36 KB)
Preview of image 'P0005175-1.JPG'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The texture on the basket needs a little more variation, and your wood
texture looks fake, maybe if you used the IsoWood include file... ;-)
Looks nice, though rather painful to model...getting those little
irregularities is a lot easier in real life. Maybe use a macro to
randomly adjust size of the reeds and add a little imperfection to the
overall shape of the basket (the eval_pattern(), eval_pigment(), and
vwarp() functions of MegaPOV might help here)...if you won't be looking
at it too closely, you may get away with separate parts for the bottom
and sides, and reeds that intersect each other, but you might want to
avoid those shortcuts just for "purist" reasons...
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Chris Colefax
Subject: Re: Basket-weaving (fun with spline objects)
Date: 15 Jan 2001 18:36:01
Message: <3a638961@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Phil Clute" <pcl### [at] tiacnet> wrote:
> The basket looks great, nice work!
>
> ...and
> I hate to nit-pick, but I circled some spots that look like they
> might be mistakes. The section in green looks like it might be a
> joining area, possibly you intended this. The sections in red looks
> to me like the horizontal part that's supposed to weave under the
> verticle part is actually going through or on top.
John M. Dlugosz <joh### [at] dlugoszcom> wrote:
> I'm interested in wickerwork. Did this nit ever get an answer from The
> Master?
No, I don't think so...! Still, there's no time like the present - my best
defence here, as elsewhere, is probably laziness. That, and the fact that
the scene was created for a purpose (to illustrate certain features of the
Spline Macro File in an attractive way) which I think it serves.
For the most accurate results, I could have defined a spline that followed
the shape of the weft, weaving around each spine of the basket's profile,
adding semi-random variations for thickness and stiffness, etc. Instead, as
I descried in povray.advanced-users, the entire basket is constructed using
just four splines, and the weft using a single circular spline - and I can
still say I'm happy with the result!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
