> You romantic devil you! ;-)
>

Well... erm... thanks! ;)

Tim

Post a reply to this message

"Tim Nikias" <Tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3C3B15B2.858846CF@gmx.de...
> This is an update on the already posted "Love is a vow" image.
> I've changed floor (now using heightfield with crackle-function),
> lighting
> (a little more to the orange), texturing (Using material-maps for the
> ring's engravements) and objects (a few poses changed, all poses made
> with more eye on detail (no intersections)).
>
> What do ya think?


"Tim Nikias" <Tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3C3B15B2.858846CF@gmx.de...
> This is an update on the already posted "Love is a vow" image.
> I've changed floor (now using heightfield with crackle-function),
> lighting
> (a little more to the orange), texturing (Using material-maps for the
> ring's engravements) and objects (a few poses changed, all poses made
> with more eye on detail (no intersections)).
>
> What do ya think?

    Hi Tim. I like the concept of this idea. However, being in the jewellery
trade, I think you should alter the rings a little, they look a little too
flimsy for the finger sizes at the moment. Generally, the most popular width
is around 5mm wide for the Ladies ring and either 6/7/8 mm wide for the
Gents ring, and quite often the man will have a lower carat of gold too, so
a less richer colour may be worth the effort for a contrast, (or make the
ladies a richer 22ct colour).
   Also, make the ladies ring a smaller finger size than the Gents for
realism.

    I hope this is of some help to you.

   ~Steve~


>
> Tim

Post a reply to this message

"25ct" <25c### [at] lineonenet> wrote in message news:3c3b5009@news.povray.org...

   Sorry, I re-edited my own post and forgot to take your 'extra' post out.
:(

     ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

WOW!!!!!

Post a reply to this message

Hey, thanks for the detailed information! I'll make sure that it's updated
for more realism...

Tim

Post a reply to this message

I'll take that as a positive comment, so thanks!

Tim

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 08 Jan 2002 16:52:19 +0100, Tim Nikias wrote:

>What do ya think?

Great image, but I'd get the guys to come back and relay that floor, I 
don't like the way the light catches the cracks/joints. 

--
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

  3:18pm  up 93 days,  7:06,  1 user,  load average: 1.01, 1.03, 1.00

Post a reply to this message

"Tim Nikias" <Tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3C3C64BB.B782F32A@gmx.de...
> Hey, thanks for the detailed information! I'll make sure that it's updated
> for more realism...

     My pleasure, I look forward to seeing the result.

    ~Steve~


>
> Tim
>

Post a reply to this message

Well, the floor is a heightfield using the crackle-function.

Did your comment imply that I should use more detail (higher resolution
parsing)
or that I should use (if at all) a bumpmapped plane?

Tim

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 09 Jan 2002 21:06:13 +0100, Tim Nikias wrote:
>Well, the floor is a heightfield using the crackle-function.
>
>Did your comment imply that I should use more detail (higher resolution
>parsing)
>or that I should use (if at all) a bumpmapped plane?

I hadn't thought about how I'd do it, but probably using a pigment function on 
a plane or box rather than a height field, so keeping the surface totally flat
but still having the colur variation and pattern that you have there.

--
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

 10:45pm  up 93 days, 14:33,  1 user,  load average: 1.00, 1.03, 1.06

Post a reply to this message