 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
So, here is the last and final Gerbera-Composition. Any more
suggestions? Comments?
If there's nothing to change (no additions anymore),
this is going to be it.
I tweaked the amount of smaller petals (from 500 to a more
realistic 120) and the look of the larger outside petals (to
match a real-life gerbera).
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmx de
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'comp9.jpg' (52 KB)
Preview of image 'comp9.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tim Nikias" <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3CC6E32A.706FAE52@gmx.de...
> So, here is the last and final Gerbera-Composition.
Hard to judge it in such a low information image. I have been watching
your progress with great interest, but this is not really doing it much
justice. Probably time to do a large anti-aliased image.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The flowers are incredible.
I don't think that a clear glass vase is appropriate for the image. The
studio photograph style of the image would be ruined by bright, glaring
photons, but the vase looks very dull without them. I would suggest a test
render with an opaque or better yet sub surface scattered vase. Another
option would be a very dark glass.
-Shay
Tim Nikias <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3CC6E32A.706FAE52@gmx.de...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
So, here are two other versions:
A ceramic vase, and a dark-glass one.
I don't know for sure about the subsurface scattering. If you've
got some good code I could use, I could give it a try, otherwise,
time is against me... :-(
Shay wrote:
> The flowers are incredible.
> I don't think that a clear glass vase is appropriate for the image. The
> studio photograph style of the image would be ruined by bright, glaring
> photons, but the vase looks very dull without them. I would suggest a test
> render with an opaque or better yet sub surface scattered vase. Another
> option would be a very dark glass.
>
> -Shay
>
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'darkglass.jpg' (20 KB)
Download 'ceramic.jpg' (20 KB)
Preview of image 'darkglass.jpg'
Preview of image 'ceramic.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Nikias scribis news:3CC### [at] gmxde:
> So, here are two other versions:
> A ceramic vase, and a dark-glass one.
>
I had the woman who lets me live with her take a look and
she said that she likes the dark-glass one better.
--
Gis poste, Arto.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Between the two, I like the glass. But you might also try a metal vase with
a more simple shape, a nice semi-shiney silver texture might be really nice.
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
[ http://www.slimeland.com/images/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I cannot use any metallic vase, because the surrounding doesn't
fit. The background is a mesh, and there is a sky_sphere with
similiar coloring, yet slightly brighter for a better radiosity-effect.
I think I'll go for the dark glass one, because I have already put
a lot of effort on the glass-vase, "just" darkening it would keep
most of the work on the vase useful.
Slime wrote:
> Between the two, I like the glass. But you might also try a metal vase with
> a more simple shape, a nice semi-shiney silver texture might be really nice.
>
> - Slime
> [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
> [ http://www.slimeland.com/images/ ]
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
That's nice. How did you know that the image would
be for a woman?
Since it seems that dark-glass is in favor by 3 to 0
(you/Slime/me vs null), I'll go with the dark glass, though
tweak a little more.
Arthur Flint wrote:
>
> I had the woman who lets me live with her take a look and
> she said that she likes the dark-glass one better.
>
> --
> Gis poste, Arto.
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here's the original trace, not reduced in size. No focal-blur-AA,
because that's time-intensive and makes it look nicer, not
better.
Bill DeWitt wrote:
> Hard to judge it in such a low information image. I have been watching
> your progress with great interest, but this is not really doing it much
> justice. Probably time to do a large anti-aliased image.
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'comp9large.jpg' (270 KB)
Preview of image 'comp9large.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think the whole thing is awesome.
Great job!
Tim Nikias wrote:
> Here's the original trace, not reduced in size. No focal-blur-AA,
> because that's time-intensive and makes it look nicer, not
> better.
>
>
> Bill DeWitt wrote:
>
>
>> Hard to judge it in such a low information image. I have been watching
>>your progress with great interest, but this is not really doing it much
>>justice. Probably time to do a large anti-aliased image.
>
>
> --
> Tim Nikias
> Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
> Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I too really like the dark glass version. I think it will look subtler in
the context of the entire image.
-Shay
Tim Nikias <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3CC70C13.F5A25290@gmx.de...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I really like the image!
The glass vase seems a bit thin to me. The top edge looks almost razor
sharp.
"Tim Nikias" <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3CC6E32A.706FAE52@gmx.de...
> So, here is the last and final Gerbera-Composition. Any more
> suggestions? Comments?
> If there's nothing to change (no additions anymore),
> this is going to be it.
>
> I tweaked the amount of smaller petals (from 500 to a more
> realistic 120) and the look of the larger outside petals (to
> match a real-life gerbera).
>
> --
> Tim Nikias
> Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
> Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I am looking into that already. Problem is, that two meshes
are joint there, but I'll see what I can do. Perhaps just place
a torus, or some blobs on the vertices? I don't know if
merge will work correctly with the mesh...
But thanks for pointing that out!
Patrick Dugan wrote:
> I really like the image!
>
> The glass vase seems a bit thin to me. The top edge looks almost razor
> sharp.
>
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tim Nikias" <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3CC70DE3.C9D07958@gmx.de...
> Here's the original trace, not reduced in size. No focal-blur-AA,
> because that's time-intensive and makes it look nicer, not
> better.
If you say so.
I think this looks nice but I can't help but think that not having stair
stepping on the shoots would help. But the larger resolution allows some of
the detail that you worked so hard on show up.
There is still the unfortunate areas of the glass that looks like
coincident surfaces or something.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002 18:54:02 +0200, Tim Nikias wrote:
>
> So, here is the last and final Gerbera-Composition. Any more
> suggestions? Comments?
> If there's nothing to change (no additions anymore),
> this is going to be it.
>
> I tweaked the amount of smaller petals (from 500 to a more
> realistic 120) and the look of the larger outside petals (to
> match a real-life gerbera).
You need area lights boy.
--
%HAV-A-NICEDAY email mailto:ste### [at] zeroppsuklinuxnet
Steve web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/
or http://start.at/zero-pps
11:07am up 6 days, 7:47, 1 user, load average: 1.26, 1.23, 1.13
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 00:24:02 -0400, Bill DeWitt wrote:
>
> "Tim Nikias" <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
> news:3CC70DE3.C9D07958@gmx.de...
>> Here's the original trace, not reduced in size. No focal-blur-AA,
>> because that's time-intensive and makes it look nicer, not
>> better.
>
> If you say so.
>
> I think this looks nice but I can't help but think that not having stair
> stepping on the shoots would help. But the larger resolution allows some of
> the detail that you worked so hard on show up.
>
> There is still the unfortunate areas of the glass that looks like
> coincident surfaces or something.
I agree with Bill here, and think that the glass problem may also go away
with some AA.
--
sphere{z*5,1pigment{rgb.5}finish{reflection.3specular.5}}box{<-50,-3,-50>
<50,-2,50>pigment{checker/*\__\\__/ * \_\\__*/scale 2}finish{ambient.7}}
light_source/*__\\__\\__\\__\\__\( ~ )\__\\__\\__\\__\\*/{<2,5,1>*4,1}
/*\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\~ -/__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\*//* Steve */
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
To you both:
Yeah, some AA would definetely look good.
Ther are no coincident surfaces, inside the vase,
the rays is refracted and reflected so often, that
even a setting of 256 max_trace_level doesn't
help, because the ray probably just travels long
enough inside the vase to get darkened by fade_power...
But it isn't so obvious with some focal blur, looks more
like some curious refraction.
But all you guys have to wait for a AA version, it takes
SOOO much longer, and I cannot afford doing intensive
traces before I'm actually on a version where I can say
finished...
Steve wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 00:24:02 -0400, Bill DeWitt wrote:
> >
> > "Tim Nikias" <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
> > news:3CC70DE3.C9D07958@gmx.de...
> >> Here's the original trace, not reduced in size. No focal-blur-AA,
> >> because that's time-intensive and makes it look nicer, not
> >> better.
> >
> > If you say so.
> >
> > I think this looks nice but I can't help but think that not having stair
> > stepping on the shoots would help. But the larger resolution allows some of
> > the detail that you worked so hard on show up.
> >
> > There is still the unfortunate areas of the glass that looks like
> > coincident surfaces or something.
>
> I agree with Bill here, and think that the glass problem may also go away
> with some AA.
>
> --
> sphere{z*5,1pigment{rgb.5}finish{reflection.3specular.5}}box{<-50,-3,-50>
> <50,-2,50>pigment{checker/*\__\\__/ * \_\\__*/scale 2}finish{ambient.7}}
> light_source/*__\\__\\__\\__\\__\( ~ )\__\\__\\__\\__\\*/{<2,5,1>*4,1}
> /*\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\~ -/__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\*//* Steve */
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Not really. When using focal-blur, the sharp
edges of the shadows aren't visible. And since
its a studio-setting, too much area-light would
destroy the look.
Steve wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2002 18:54:02 +0200, Tim Nikias wrote:
> >
> > So, here is the last and final Gerbera-Composition. Any more
> > suggestions? Comments?
> > If there's nothing to change (no additions anymore),
> > this is going to be it.
> >
> > I tweaked the amount of smaller petals (from 500 to a more
> > realistic 120) and the look of the larger outside petals (to
> > match a real-life gerbera).
>
> You need area lights boy.
>
> --
> %HAV-A-NICEDAY email mailto:ste### [at] zeroppsuklinuxnet
> Steve web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/
> or http://start.at/zero-pps
> 11:07am up 6 days, 7:47, 1 user, load average: 1.26, 1.23, 1.13
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Yeah, some AA would definetely look good.
> Ther are no coincident surfaces, inside the vase,
> the rays is refracted and reflected so often, that
> even a setting of 256 max_trace_level doesn't
> help, because the ray probably just travels long
> enough inside the vase to get darkened by fade_power...
> But it isn't so obvious with some focal blur, looks more
> like some curious refraction.
Try lower adc_bailout (if you haven't already)
-tgq
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Holy cats-- that's beauteous. Rocks the Casbah. Great job.
DZ
Tim Nikias wrote:
> So, here is the last and final Gerbera-Composition. Any more
> suggestions? Comments?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I'll try, but I'm thinking it all has to do either
with the incoming ray being in such a strange
angle to the glass, that its just bouncing around
in the glass.
Ohterwise, it could also be related to the
smooth-triangles/mesh bug which cannot
be fixed in Povray 3.5 (the bug which also
affects heightfields and their correct tracing).
I'll see what I can do, but it doesn't look to bad actually.
TinCanMan wrote:
> > Yeah, some AA would definetely look good.
> > Ther are no coincident surfaces, inside the vase,
> > the rays is refracted and reflected so often, that
> > even a setting of 256 max_trace_level doesn't
> > help, because the ray probably just travels long
> > enough inside the vase to get darkened by fade_power...
> > But it isn't so obvious with some focal blur, looks more
> > like some curious refraction.
> Try lower adc_bailout (if you haven't already)
>
> -tgq
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
If you want to mail the vase to me within the next three hours, I can take a
look this evening and see if I can spot the problem.
-Shay
Tim Nikias <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3CC85619.15FEFEB2@gmx.de...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I was running through my code and trying to prepare a
vase for you to look at. But, you'd be overloaded with
the "unknown". Tons of Macros of which I haven't
yet written good comments and descriptions, declarations
all around the place, though not in random order,
hard to describe.
I'll send a version without all but the vase, and
all the required includes I've written, but if you cannot
find through the mess, I won't complain. ;-)
In any case, thanks for your offer!
Shay wrote:
> If you want to mail the vase to me within the next three hours, I can take a
> look this evening and see if I can spot the problem.
>
> -Shay
>
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Nikias <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3CC8596C.6C6145F5@gmx.de...
>
> I'll send a version without all but the vase, and
> all the required includes I've written, but if you cannot
> find through the mess, I won't complain. ;-)
>
Awesome. If you don't make the mail to me by 5:00 US Central standard time
(2:47 here now), I will email you my home email addy. I will look and see if
I can't find what's causing the appearance of a sharp edge along the top as
well.
-Shay
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I've taken care of the sharp edge (two meshes,
the inside and outside: inside based on outside,
that sharp edge was due to the same coords
for that area), so a new connection was made
using my cubic-bezier-splines-algorithm for
every two coords...
Like I said, mesh-modelling-macros...
And just sent it on its way.
Shay wrote:
> Awesome. If you don't make the mail to me by 5:00 US Central standard time
> (2:47 here now), I will email you my home email addy. I will look and see if
> I can't find what's causing the appearance of a sharp edge along the top as
> well.
>
> -Shay
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tim Nikias" <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3CC85619.15FEFEB2@gmx.de...
> I'll try, but I'm thinking it all has to do either
> with the incoming ray being in such a strange
> angle to the glass, that its just bouncing around
> in the glass.
Probably, AA would probably help this as well.
-tgq
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
You have some cool macros. The black spots are just what was expected, not
enough max_trace_level. Just a torus primitive placed into the scene still
had black dots at max_trace_level 40. I carefully examined a wireframe of
your meshes and found no twisting or overlapping which might cause inverted
normals or other problems.
The mesh did have some odd properties which might cause a some problems. The
inside intersected with the outside and the mesh was not closed. I fit the
inside into the outside and closed the mesh and the pinholes on the bottom
and combined the whole thing into one mesh2 statement. I can post it if you
would like, but I'm not sure if you would notice the difference in your
scene.
-Shay
Tim Nikias <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3CC85E72.FAB68679@gmx.de...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The black spots could be removed by cheating your glass and lowering the ior
to 1.
-Shay
Shay <sah### [at] simcopartscom> wrote in message news:3cc96fba@news.povray.org...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ah, well, then it wouldn't look like real glass anymore, would it?
I am thankful for your experiments, but rather than having you send me
your mesh2 object, I'd like to know what exactly the problems are
with the mesh.
I think I can overcome the not-closed problem with some vector-
copy-pasting, shouldn't be too hard to implement into the macros. Would
be an enhancement, I guess then the macros would be doing the job
they are supposed to (merging meshes, attaching new ones etc).
The pinholes can probably be overcome with another macro not
included into the version I gave you, which I use for creating the surface
of the water: it takes one line of the mesh and connects all those to
a single point. Making either the pinholes larger and using that, or just
keeping the small pinholes, would probably do the job.
Where did the inside intersect with the outside? I did some trials,
and found no intersection (though I may not have looked closely enough),
but that could be the possibility on the bottom, the algorithm used
there doesn't fit the exact needs of being not-intersecting there...
Shay wrote:
> The black spots could be removed by cheating your glass and lowering the ior
> to 1.
>
> -Shay
>
> Shay <sah### [at] simcopartscom> wrote in message news:3cc96fba@news.povray.org...
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thank you very much.
DZ wrote:
> Holy cats-- that's beauteous. Rocks the Casbah. Great job.
>
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I wrote some new macros to get rid of the intersection
of inside and outside (an Uneven_Translate-Macro).
And some macros now copy other vectors instead
of doing stuff like vrotate(Vector,y*360), so float-
inconsistencies should also be taken care of.
But I tried with max_trace_level 256, and I still get
those black edges on the top-inside of the vase. What
did you exactly do?
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tim Nikias" <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3CCA9878.760010E0@gmx.de...
>
> But I tried with max_trace_level 256, and I still get
> those black edges on the top-inside of the vase. What
> did you exactly do?
>
I think that some of this is natural behavior. I tried displaying just the
Lathe_Outside object with pigment {rgbt 1} interior {ior 1.56} and nothing
else. I still saw some dark spots. The spots can be minimised by specifying
fade_color at .5.
I thought that the spots might be caused by reversed normals or crossed
triangles, but there is none of that in your mesh except for the bottom/top
intersection which you already took care of.
I do know that the default max_trace_level will give a max reached warning.
I closed the mesh by connectiong all of the meshes and then connecting the
outside pinhole with the inside pinhole. This gave a torus type mesh.
I'm sure you also noticed that the defaut aa settings are not sufficient for
the vase.
-Shay
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Okay, so max_trace_level is of no real concern.
What do you mean with aa settings? Do you mean the
blur_samples of 125 should be higher? They'll be higher for the
final version, of course, but what would you propose?
Shay wrote:
> I'm sure you also noticed that the defaut aa settings are not sufficient for
> the vase.
I also took care of the vase intersecting with the background
mesh (by writing a macro which searches the mesh for a lowest
given axis... hehe, another one for the list), the water doesn't
intersect with the vase and has a better surface normal.
Oh, another attached image showing a new change of the vase.
Notice the nice bumps near the bottom? Adding surface-normals
with these useful sine-waves...
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'newvase.jpg' (158 KB)
Preview of image 'newvase.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tim Nikias" <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3CCADCD4.FBA8867F@gmx.de...
The high blur settings may solve the problem. Other than that, you may have
to use +A0.03 or something like that. I just ran a pic at 1280x1024 with
default aa and shrank it to 640x512. The results were quite nice(attached)
-Shay
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'vaseJPG.jpg' (3 KB)
Preview of image 'vaseJPG.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The image will be traced even larger than 1600x1200, because
I will need a 600dpi resolution to print the image with a
color-laser-printer.
Also, I cannot combine AA and focal-blur, its one or the
other. But I'll probably use very high blur-samples, because
focal-blur appears much more realistic.
Well, thanks for your help! I think I'm going through the final
steps of working on blur/radiosity/photon details, cause the
image needs to be traced in a few days time...
Shay wrote:
> The high blur settings may solve the problem. Other than that, you may have
> to use +A0.03 or something like that. I just ran a pic at 1280x1024 with
> default aa and shrank it to 640x512. The results were quite nice(attached)
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmxde
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
