Ib Rasmussen wrote:

> So, with Gilles Tran's cars I have finally finished my church scene.

Without a doubt a true "Rasmussen": highly detailed with this particular
model-like look. Congratulations for another incredible scene! As
others already pointed out, the sky does not really fit into the picture,
but I assume that it looks like you want it to, because you entitled
the picture as finished.

Marvelous work!
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Ib Rasmussen wrote:
> 
> > It would be nice if you on occasion could
> > give an insight into the way you model your buildings.
> 
> There really isn't much to reveal. As some has pointed out, patience is
> the main ingredient. I hardly use anything but the most basic CSG
> objects. I just use lots and lots of 'em.

Well, i was more referring to the way you plan and do your work.  You seem
to declare elements that are used several times but don't use macros a
lot.  You also don't declare reoccurring measures but directly use
numbers.  Do you draw a lot of things on paper or do you have all measures
in mind?

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 28 Feb. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

Christoph Hormann wrote:

> Well, i was more referring to the way you plan and do your work.



Oh, you mean I should plan my work? I knew I was doing something wrong :)

Well, first I pick a building. It should be something that lends itself 
to my csg-only style of modelling. Brick buildings are good - Antonio 
Gaudi's buildings are not.


Then I take a lot of photos of it. From the photos I draw up a ground 
plan, to get the major dimensions down. With brick building this is 
mainly a matter of counting bricks. At this point I usually find that I 
don't have photos of all the details I need, so I take some more. (This 
normally repeats itself several times during a project. I have taken 
over 850 photos for the church scene.)

Once I have the overall dimensions, I may model a crude mock-up, just to 
check the proportions, but that was not necessary with the church, since 
the bricks gave me precise measurements over most of the building.

Now I divide the building up it some large parts, pick one and start 
modelling, more or less from the ground up. Each part is divided into 
smaller parts, which are again divided into smaller parts, down to a 
level, where it is suitable to model as a unit. Then the parts are 
assembled level for level, until assembling the whole building is a 
matter of sticking a dozen parts together. Everything is declared, 
modelled around origin, and moved to its place during assembly.

I do some loose sketching on paper, but mostly I use a CAD program.
I have done this long enough so I can model simpler stuff with the help 
of a few lines on a piece of paper, but more complex stuff, I construct 
in 2D in the CAD program, from which I can pull out the dimensions and 
coordinates I need for Pov.

Not much to it, really.

/Ib

Post a reply to this message

> All vans look the same to me, but if we can trust the
> filename, it should be a Nissan Quest.

Pretty close, mine is a Nissan Serena. They look pretty much the same, as
far as I can see.. Hmm.. I'd like to get my hands on that model..

Regards,
Hugo

Post a reply to this message

Hugo Asm wrote:

> Pretty close, mine is a Nissan Serena. They look pretty much the same, as
> far as I can see.. Hmm.. I'd like to get my hands on that model..

That would be difficult, as it is only a *virtual* model :->

All right, I know what you mean. I think, if you ask Gilles Tran nicely, 
he will give it to you, too.

/Ib

Post a reply to this message

Ib Rasmussen wrote:
> 
> So, with Gilles Tran's cars I have finally finished my church scene.
> The attached image is rendered at 5 times the shown resolution, gaussian

> effects in the brick pattern (that should please Rafal :-).

I've had this problem with both bricks and lettering at a distance.
I've solved both problems by blurring the texture, using a macro that
blurs it according to the render resolution, camera angle, and distance.

I used the technique in my current IRTC entry, which has some signs in
the background; the signs get aliased too much without the technique.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

Hey John

> I've had this problem with both bricks and lettering at a distance.
> I've solved both problems by blurring the texture, using a macro that
> blurs it according to the render resolution, camera angle, and distance.

Would you mind sharing the code? This macro is really useful!

florian

Post a reply to this message

Tek wrote:
>Very nice modelling, yet somehow it doesn't look very realistic. I suggest using
>a different sky, and changing the lighting, at the moment both those things seem
>quite artificial.
>
>The details in the scene are great.All the concrete posts and signs and road
>markings, exactly the kind of thing that should be there but that are lacking
>from a lot of CG. Very nice work.
>
>--
>Tek
>http://www.evilsuperbrain.com
>

I agree.  The buildings are outstanding!

Try using an area light, or radiosity, and create a more detailed texture
for the road--like with lighter-colored areas where cars have worn down the
asphalt.

Post a reply to this message

Florian Brucker wrote:
> 
> Hey John
> 
> > I've had this problem with both bricks and lettering at a distance.
> > I've solved both problems by blurring the texture, using a macro that
> > blurs it according to the render resolution, camera angle, and distance.
> 
> Would you mind sharing the code? This macro is really useful!

Something like this:

pigment { average
  pigment_map {
#local iI=0;#while(iI<Divisions)
  #local iJ=0;#while(iJ<Divisions)
    [1 myPigment
      translate vU*(iI-Divisions/2+1)/Divisions
      translate vV*(iJ-Divisions/2+1)/Divisions
    ]
  #local iJ=iJ+1;#end
#local iI=iI+1;#end
}

For this code, myPigment is already defined as your basic pigment.
vU and vV are chosen to lie within the plane of the surface to which
the pigment is to be applied.  The magnitude of the vectors should
be equal to the distance from the camera location to the surface,
divided by the image_height and the length of the camera's direction
vector.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

Hey John!

> Something like this:
>
> [nice piece of code]

Thanks for sharing!

florian

Post a reply to this message