 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Dainel Radcliffe Who is to play Harry Potter in the movie is UK born so no need to
shudder....
Remco de Korte wrote:
> Impressive. I'm not sure how realistic it is but I think the atmosphere is very
> good, especially in the second image (#2). I didn't have a clear picture of the
> castle but would have thought it to be a bit less smooth and wellstructured, a
> bit more chaotic and higher. That is of course the thing that also happens every
> time you see a movie after a book you read. It's always different from what you
> pictured it to be. I wonder what the Potter-movie will bring. I read they had an
> American kid playing Harry... shudder...
> Anyway, great images, I always like your architectural scenes.
>
> Remco
>
> Robert J Becraft wrote:
> >
> > "News Flash.
> >
> > Muggle photographs of the famous Hogwarts School for Magicians have just
> > surfaced. Obviously smuggled out of the area and having avoided all magic
> > detection, these are the first known photographs available to muggles ever
> > published."
> >
> > 01 is the castle
> > 02 is Hagrid's looking back towards the castle
> >
> > The ground is bizarre... the trees are too. I'm experimenting. The ground
> > is a three level texture. I've got more work to play with. It is not bad
> > in the distance, but up close, it gets an alien look to it.
> >
> > Enjoy.
> >
> > Robert J Becraft
> > aka cas### [at] aol com
> >
> > [Image]
> >
> > [Image]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tom Melly <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote:
> "Remco de Korte" <rem### [at] onwijscom> wrote in message
> news:3A5E2537.6790ABBB@onwijs.com...
>> American kid playing Harry... shudder...
> I'm fairly sure Rowling vetoed anything but uk kid.
She did. Spielburg wanted the kid from Sixth Sense, but she veto'd it, and
for that reason, he left the project. So insteand, we're getting the
director from the Home Alone movies *shudder* ....
Geoff
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Geoff Wedig" <wed### [at] darwinepbicwruedu> wrote in message
news:3a5f0359@news.povray.org...
> She did. Spielburg wanted the kid from Sixth Sense, but she veto'd it,
and
> for that reason, he left the project. So insteand, we're getting the
> director from the Home Alone movies *shudder* ....
>
Chris Columbus!?! Oh, God... On the whole, I'd rather have gone with
Spielburg and the 6th Sense kid...
Rowling is weird - they broadcast a reading of the first book on the radio
over here on boxing day. The whole thing, unabridged, without breaks. It was
the only way she would let it happen.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Psychomech wrote:
>
> Dainel Radcliffe Who is to play Harry Potter in the movie is UK born so no need to
> shudder....
>
Obviously I wasn't quite up-to-date but reading the other messages there still
may be cause for concern?
I wonder: why can't this be an English (British?) movie? The UK does have its
own industry, but perhaps they lack the funds?
Remco
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Remco de Korte" <rem### [at] onwijscom> wrote in message
news:3A5F1150.2EB1FB59@onwijs.com...
> I wonder: why can't this be an English (British?) movie? The UK does have
its
> own industry, but perhaps they lack the funds?
>
Getting way OT here (weee!), but basically a) we're a bit crap and b) it
seems fair to assume that the best offer to Rowling came from the States.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks for expanding my vision. I must relate my shock (and strong
*appreciation*) at seeing trees of the kind of construction you used. I used a
similar method in my first IRTC entry, and was frankly way too thin-skinned
about how it fared. The message droned into my head over the years was "cool &
stylistic: BAD." This is no fault of anyone but my own, but goes to show how
one can retreat from a useful style for the wrong reasons--I need to unlearn
what I've been learning. I often wonder what I would be producing if I'd
waited much longer before submitting stuff to the IRTC.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tom Melly wrote:
>
> "Remco de Korte" <rem### [at] onwijscom> wrote in message
> news:3A5F1150.2EB1FB59@onwijs.com...
>
> > I wonder: why can't this be an English (British?) movie? The UK does have
> its
> > own industry, but perhaps they lack the funds?
> >
>
> Getting way OT here (weee!), but basically a) we're a bit crap and b) it
> seems fair to assume that the best offer to Rowling came from the States.
Sorry, got carried away a bit...
Chances are a big part of the movie will be computer generated.
Anyway, it's a great theme for POV-scenes as is shown by these two images (at
the top of the thread).
Remco
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Damn that's cool, great atmosphere!
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I actually developed these trees very early. I downloaded an animation off
of AOL that was a walk through a forest. The trees for that were cones on
cylinders... I made them multi-cones on cone trunks with clear spots in the
texture. I've played with this texture for 4 years now... still haven't
gotten something I like.
The other problem is the rand function in POV is too regular. If you create
a set of random objects in a 50x50 area, and look at them from above, they
come out looking like a 50x50 box with mostly evenly placed objects. I'd
like to have the objects truely randomly placed in the box such that some
areas were denser than others, leaving clearings etc.
Haven't found a way to do this yet. This would also help when generating
tree-parts or vines for buildings in that the clear spaces would be openings
in the branches or exposed wall sections.
If anyone has a way to get this to happen in POV I'd surely like to have it.
Robert.
aka cas### [at] aolcom
Greg M. Johnson <gre### [at] my-dejanewscom> wrote in message
news:3A5F4AF4.F433D124@my-dejanews.com...
> Thanks for expanding my vision. I must relate my shock (and strong
> *appreciation*) at seeing trees of the kind of construction you used. I
used a
> similar method in my first IRTC entry, and was frankly way too
thin-skinned
> about how it fared. The message droned into my head over the years was
"cool &
> stylistic: BAD." This is no fault of anyone but my own, but goes to show
how
> one can retreat from a useful style for the wrong reasons--I need to
unlearn
> what I've been learning. I often wonder what I would be producing if I'd
> waited much longer before submitting stuff to the IRTC.
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It's just fog.
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote in message
news:3A5FBF4D.D3BDF9D9@faricy.net...
> Damn that's cool, great atmosphere!
>
> --
> David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
> My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
