Yes, that does seem to be the case; the 'roots' or whatever they are clearly
contact the plane underneath the waves.

--

//Mahalis
camera{location<0,0.25,-2> look_at 0.5*y} #declare T=texture{pigment{crackle
scale 0.5 rotate 90 turbulence 0.75 color_map{[0 rgb 1][0.05 rgb 1][0.1
rgb<1,0.25,1>][0.25 rgbf 1][1 rgbf 1]}} finish{ambient 1}} #declare
c=difference{torus{0.5,0.1 rotate -90*x}box{<0.7,0,0.2>,<-0.7,-0.7,-0.2>}}
merge{object{c translate<0.5,0.5,0>} object{c translate<-0.5,0.5,0>}
cylinder{<1,0.5,0>,<1,0,0>,0.1} cylinder{<-1,0.5,0>,<-1,0,0>,0.1}
cylinder{0.5*y,0,0.1} texture{T}}
--


"Andrew" <ast### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:3bf7c404@news.povray.org...
> > 2) Your plane isn't.  A plane is a 2-dimensional entity,
> >    and your plane has the appearance of vertical variance,
> >    hence isn't strictly 2-d.
>
>
> But it could be a true plane underwater...
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Kevin Wampler wrote:
> 
> I realized that I have never done a reflective sphere over a checkered
> plane image, so I thought I'd give it a shot.  Comments/suggestions?
> 

Neat, but i think some sky etc. around would not be bad.

Christoph

-- 
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other 
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

Original... :) I like.

Post a reply to this message

"Timothy R. Cook" wrote:
> 
> Comments:
> 2) Your plane isn't.  A plane is a 2-dimensional entity,
>    and your plane has the appearance of vertical variance,
>    hence isn't strictly 2-d.

It looks like a plane underwater to me, and besides, it could still be
2d if it only needs two variables for a parametric represnetation, ie,
has no volume, like a mesh.  Nyah nyah.  :)

-- 
David Fontaine  <dav### [at] faricynet>  ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

Awesome idea.

Personally I would change the color of the branches a little.

-- 
David Fontaine  <dav### [at] faricynet>  ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message

Christoph Hormann wrote:

>
> Neat, but i think some sky etc. around would not be bad.

There is a hint or suggestion of sky in the top half of the reflection in
the sphere. it looks great. nice work!!

Post a reply to this message

"Timothy R. Cook" wrote:

> 2) Your plane isn't.  A plane is a 2-dimensional entity,
>    and your plane has the appearance of vertical variance,
>    hence isn't strictly 2-d.
> 
> Nyah nyah ;)

I was going to mention that that's actually water over the checkered
plane, but then I remembered that the "plane" itself actually has a bump
under the plant, so I figured it wouldn't be a very good rebuttal.

	~Kevin Wampler~

Post a reply to this message

James Foster wrote:
> 
> Christoph Hormann wrote:
> 
> >
> > Neat, but i think some sky etc. around would not be bad.
> 
> There is a hint or suggestion of sky in the top half of the reflection in
> the sphere. it looks great. nice work!!

Thanks!  There is a sky, generated by Chris Colefax's galaxy include
file.  I suppose that I could cove the camera so that you could see it,
but I rather like the effect of the current camera position.

	~Kevin Wampler~

Post a reply to this message

David Fontaine wrote:
> 
> Awesome idea.

Thanks!

> Personally I would change the color of the branches a little.

I don't know about the overall color, but I do think that they could use
more color variation.  I suppose I might also want to use isosurfaces to
give them a very cracked bark as a surface.

	~Kevin Wampler~

Post a reply to this message

Hey Kevin and Folks,

> I realized that I have never done a reflective sphere
[snip]

At last a clever, novel and beautiful interpretation of a classic

Blessings,
          Brendan
-- 
Michael Brendan Hurley           ShadowDancerEnterprizes, LTD.
POV:  http://www.geocities.com/mbrendanh/index.html
HOME: http://www.saber.net/~mbhcgc/index.shtml
mbh### [at] sabernet

Post a reply to this message