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 
blured, reduced in size and then sharpened, to get rid of the moiré 
effects in the brick pattern (that should please Rafal :-). 
Unfortunately the technique leaves the image a bit unsharp, but you 
can't get everything, I suppose.

More images in my gallery at 
http://www.ibras.ishoejby.dk/sktmarkus/stmarkus.htm

Now I should have time to do a bit of modelling for the Capriccio project.

/Ib

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'sktmark82s.jpg' (86 KB)

Preview of image 'sktmark82s.jpg'

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

Post a reply to this message

Fantastic!


I'm bookmarking your gallery for later exploration.

--
Will


"Ib Rasmussen" <ib### [at] ibrasdk> wrote in message
news:3E9### [at] ibrasdk...
> 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
> blured, reduced in size and then sharpened, to get rid of the moiré
> effects in the brick pattern (that should please Rafal :-).
> Unfortunately the technique leaves the image a bit unsharp, but you
> can't get everything, I suppose.
>
> More images in my gallery at
> http://www.ibras.ishoejby.dk/sktmarkus/stmarkus.htm
>

Post a reply to this message

There is something very satisfying about richly detailed, deep red 
brickwork.  Congrats on solving the moire problem, well, on solving the 
brickwork problem in all its aspects.  Just beautiful.

Post a reply to this message

I should have visited your site and saw the other views before 
responding.  "Beautiful" doesn't say it well enough.  They are exquisite!

Post a reply to this message

> More images in my gallery at 
> http://www.ibras.ishoejby.dk/sktmarkus/stmarkus.htm

  Wow! Fantastic... no wonder why they say that patience is the mother
of science. It's a pain you can't share with us a bit of that terrific
patience you have.

  Technically, I can only complain, as others, about the sky. The
lighting seems good, but the sky doesn't match that sun: altought it's
not very harsh, it doesn't seem logical for such a cloudy day. Perhaps a
simple, clear, more bluish sky would have worked fine.

  Another problem is that shadows are totally black, but I can't really
expect you using radiosity with such scene on today computers... :)

-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres
		
La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

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
> blured, reduced in size and then sharpened, to get rid of the moiré
> effects in the brick pattern (that should please Rafal :-).
> Unfortunately the technique leaves the image a bit unsharp, but you
> can't get everything, I suppose.

As usual great modelling work!  It would be nice if you on occasion could
give an insight into the way you model your buildings.  

As others have mentioned you could improve the sky.  The lighting looks
fairly consistent although the shadows quite strongly differ in brightness
on the left and on the right.  I would suggest trying radiosity but with
that complexity of the scene and the high memory use this could be
difficult of course.  Trying some fill light could work though.

For saving memory you could try to use meshes for some repetitive
geometries.  Especially the trees would be more efficient this way (unless
they already are meshes)

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

very nicely done !!! what a big scene
maybe you can use a texture or image for the roads and broadways because
they look very synthetical imo. it takes down much realism.
once again, very nice overall image, congragulations


"Ib Rasmussen" <ib### [at] ibrasdk> schreef in bericht
news:3E9### [at] ibrasdk...
> 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
> blured, reduced in size and then sharpened, to get rid of the moiré
> effects in the brick pattern (that should please Rafal :-).
> Unfortunately the technique leaves the image a bit unsharp, but you
> can't get everything, I suppose.
>
> More images in my gallery at
> http://www.ibras.ishoejby.dk/sktmarkus/stmarkus.htm
>
> Now I should have time to do a bit of modelling for the Capriccio project.
>
> /Ib
>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

Post a reply to this message

Wow! That looks absolutely great!  Except for the sky.  :o)  You could get
"everything" by using an imagemap there. By the way, the white van looks
suspeciously much like my own.

Stunning work! Your talent seems to improve.

Regards,
Hugo

Post a reply to this message

Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:

> It's a pain you can't share with us a bit of that terrific
> patience you have.


I would have attached some to this msg, but I didn't know what MIME-type 
to use ;-)


> Another problem is that shadows are totally black,


They shouldn't be, as I have used the ol' primitive trick of putting a 
light source in the camera, to soften up the shadows. The shadows on the 
vertical faces looks ok, but on the streets they seem very dark. I blame 
my tarmac texture (it is a granite pigment with a granite normal), it 
has behaved strangely in other respects.


On the other hand, in the digital photos I have taken of the area in 
sunlight, the shadows on the tarmac are almost black, too. Perhaps it 
all comes down to the low density range of digital images.

/Ib

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter wrote:

> There is something very satisfying about richly detailed, deep red 
> brickwork.


Yes, in more that one way. It is so much easier to make look, well, 
'interesting' than say a plastered or painted surface. And it makes it 
easy to get the dimensions right, you just count the bricks.

> Congrats on solving the moire problem, 


The credit goes to Kari Kivisalo who suggested the technique.


/Ib

Post a reply to this message

Hugo Asm wrote:

> By the way, the white van looks suspeciously much like my own.

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

/Ib

Post a reply to this message

Christoph Hormann 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.

  If you want examples, I posted the source for one of the buildings in 
p.b.s-f a while ago. Or you could take a look at the St Pauls dome, I 
posted for the Capriccio project recently. But I warn you: it is boring 
reading. :)

/Ib

Post a reply to this message

Thank you to you all for your kind comments.

One recurring "complaint" is that sky isn't realistic. To that I have 
this to say:

I like to model buildings, and I like to try to make them look 
interesting by modelling a lot of details, as opposed to doing fancy 
tricks with textures. I only use bitmap textures, if I can't avoid it 
(like the mosaics above the church doors).

The object of interest to me in this scene is the church. The sky, 
streets, trees, cars and the other building are merely set pieces, and 
it doesn't bother me much, if they look a bit artificial. After all, if 
I wanted a photorealistic image, I would have used my digital camera.

So there :)

/Ib

Post a reply to this message

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
> blured, reduced in size and then sharpened, to get rid of the moiré
> 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