 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Duncan Gray wrote:
>
>...
>I'll post @1024x768 when finished if you like.
Yes please.
--
Best regards,
Tor Olav
mailto:tor### [at] hotmail com
http://www.crosswinds.net/~tok
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Duncan Gray wrote:
>
> ddombrow wrote:
> > I'd say the on the left looks excellent, and I wouldn't think a glass
> marble
> > would crack without shattering completely. Then again, I never played with
> > marbles much.
>
> I've used the wrong term really, my mistake. Crack does imply some depth to
> the damage, and if a marble were found in this state, then it would surely
> become two fractions of a marble next time it were dropped.
>
> Perhaps scratched would perhaps better describe the effect I'm searching
> for. Does anyone out there have access to any well used marbles; can you
> check should I be going for scratched and chipped, or just chipped ?
The marbles found in aerosol paint cans look just like the one on the
right.
>
> I'm thinking also that I've got the coloured bit all wrong as well. Should
> be more ribbon-like, less solid.
Yes.
--
Francois Labreque | //\\ Wear an ASCII ribbon!
flabreque | || ||
@ | \\// Support the campain
videotron.ca \\ against HTML e-mail
//\\ and news!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Those are nice. I've been trying to do a few marbles myself lately, but
you're way ahead of me.
Setep
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think the left one is much better. Glass is pretty resistant to deformation,
at a certain level of stress it'll just break.
From what I remember of my marbles, back before I lost 'em, the colored part is
much more two-dimensional. What I would do; imagine spinning a disc to make a
sphere, but instead of tracing out infinite copies of the disc, trace out some
number like three. Then take this whole thing and twist it around the same axis
you spun the disc around, so you get a multiple helix thing, with edges along a
sphere or ellipsoid.
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
These look very nice but the swirly coloured patterns (I'm trying to use the
correct terminology here) don't look like any marbles that I used in my
youth. The patterns that I remember were more like leaves with two or three
twisted slightly.
Chips and scratches were very common, given that concrete and ashphalt were
the kinds of surfaces played on. The one on the right looks too severe, the
one on the left is better but probably needs more. I don't ever remember a
marble breaking so they must have been very resistant to cracking.
Does anyone remember the names of the different types of marbles and their
relative values. There was a hierarchy but can't remember, other than that
the ones shown were the basic marble with the lowest value. Other types that
were higher value were :
- Dobbers (same as basic but approx twice? the diameter).
- Transparent (both normal and dobber size) in various colours
- Transparent with small bubbles.
- Opaque (white was popular), sometimes with swirly patterns on the outside.
- Ballbearings (metal both normal and dobber size)
Can anyone remember any other marble jargon ?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Of course it was only a joke ...
Yes dispersion and photons are features of MP...
They will probably render your image in about 24h ...
I just noticed, I'm working at 1152x864, so this size would be preferred ...
only some pixel more ;-)
--
plane{y,0 pigment{color rgb 1}}camera{location<1,5,-2>look_at
0}light_source{10 color 1}#macro m(a,b,c,n,i)#if(i=0)cylinder{a,b,c/3
pigment{color rgb z}}#else #local f=vlength(a-b)/32;#local d=(b-a)/8;#local
e=(vcross(d,n)/vlength(vcross(d,n)))*f*4;m(a-e,a+2*d+e,f,n,i-1)m(a+e,a+2*d-e
,f,n,i-1)m(a+3*d-e,a+3*d+e,f,n,i-1)m(a+3*d-e,a+5*d-e,f,n,i-1)m(a+6*d-e,a+6*d
+e,f,n,i-1)m(a+8*d-e,a+8*d+e,f,n,i-1)#end #end m(-4*x,2*x,1/8,y,4) // Jan
Walzer
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Richard Morton" <rmm### [at] anywhereyoulike> wrote in message
news:3a90ebd1@news.povray.org...
>
> Does anyone remember the names of the different types of marbles and their
> relative values.
> - Ballbearings (metal both normal and dobber size)
>
> Can anyone remember any other marble jargon ?
Although I played with marbles I remember little of the nomenclature about
them, however we called the ballbearings steelies.
About the rendering, I've always thought of the glass as being tinted green.
They look real good to me anyway, even if not fitting my idea of a marble
exactly.
Side note on marbles: I have 5 ceramic marbles that were excavated from the
1996 Olympic games site Atlanta, Georgia, USA where a marble factory existed
going back to the 1800's. Maybe I should render them.
Having said that I did try to. See attachment please.
Bob H.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'ceramic marbles.jpg' (24 KB)
Preview of image 'ceramic marbles.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The one on the right looks closest to a used marble.
From what I vaguely remember is that the marbles have the
green-glass-tint-look(absorbing media). When they're used a lot they get
tiny white chips resulting in a dirty-white or ash look. I also remember
marbles getting quite large chips in them, sometimes preventing from rolling
straight.
For the coloured swirls inside I'd suggest using then same index of
refraction as the glass to remove the 'bubble' look. Maybe something with a
bozo transparency might do the trick to get that blended look....
Nekar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois Labreque wrote:
> The marbles found in aerosol paint cans look just like the one on the
> right.
What on earth possesed you to break open a can and find out ?
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jan Walzer wrote:
> Yes dispersion and photons are features of MP...
Ah, I'll wait for POV 3.5 - got fed up with trying to convert all my Halo's,
so on the whole I prefer to stick to the current official version, and now
try to limit myself to what is finialised (as opposed to the 'warning this
may change' which I ignored to my peril with respect to the halo operation.
> I just noticed, I'm working at 1152x864, so this size would be preferred
...
> only some pixel more ;-)
No worries - my Compaq only needs it as 800x600, so the 1024x768 was going
to be 'by special request' anyway. It might take a little while but you'll
get it in the end.
Just noticed actually, my desktop needs it at 1152x864 as well.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
