 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
My IRTC anim entry that have been doing my head in this week, so inspired by
David Fontaine's 'Orange Wedge' and Tor Olav Kristensen 'Bonds' and 'Other
Bonds' I decided to take the weekend off animating, and render myself some
new marbles to replace those I'm loosing.
I'm trying to give the surface of the marble a well-used look, with varying
degrees of success. The marble on the left I like, but it's not quite
right - dunno why. The one on the right - though it looks wonderfully old,
doesn't look like it should be in one piece anymore. I'm trying to get
something between these two - cracks rather than dents, but not so badly
cracked that the whole surface is covered.
Any suggestions on how to improve the look ? Would I do better to create
myself some solid cracks, and CSG these out of the surface rather than
trying to do it with a normal ?
(N.B. Current normals (for 1 untit radius spheres) are:
Left_marble=normal { crackle 1 poly_wave 3 normal_map {
[ 0 crackle 0 poly_wave 3 ]
[ .3 crackle 0 poly_wave 3 ]
[ .3 crackle -1 poly_wave 3 ]
[ 1 crackle -1 poly_wave 3 ]
} scale .05 }
Right_marble=normal { crackle 1 normal_map {
[ 0 crackle .5 ]
[ .1 crackle .5 ]
[ .1 crackle 0 ]
[ 1 crackle 0 ]
} scale .1 }
)
Render time 1hr 12mins on a PII 450 using POV-Ray 3.1g.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'marbles.jpg' (21 KB)
Preview of image 'marbles.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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.
Well done.
--
Dan D.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Where are the photons and dispersion???
Of course ... great work ...
If you'd render it in 1024x768, I'd take it as wallpaper ... *g
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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 ?
I'm thinking also that I've got the coloured bit all wrong as well. Should
be more ribbon-like, less solid.
Think I best head for the toy shop this week and remind myself what they
look like !
Thanks for your thoughts.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jan Walzer wrote:
> Where are the photons and dispersion???
> Of course ... great work ...
> If you'd render it in 1024x768, I'd take it as wallpaper ... *g
photons and dispersion ... ummm ... am I missing something here, can't find
them in the manual; I'm using POV-Ray 3.1g, is this something I need MegaPov
for ?
I do have an area spot-light currently commented out in the scene, It helps
to bring out the faked caustics but it takes it from a 2 hour render up to
about 8 hours. As I'm still concentrating on the surface I need to cut the
render time so the scene is lit with a point light at the moment.
Re wallpaper, that's exacly what it's intended for - I've just bought myself
a new laptop and I'm sick of looking at the compaq logo already, so I
decided to thoroughly test the machine by rendering the weekend away on it;
ray-tracing itself a new wallpaper. I'll post @1024x768 when finished if you
like.
Cheers.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Setepenaset wrote:
> Those are nice. I've been trying to do a few marbles myself lately, but
> you're way ahead of me.
Your too kind - I'll post the source when done so you can see how I built
the twirly bits in the middle (blobs, basically) - the rest of it is pretty
straightforward - superellipsoids for the tiles (what else ?) and sphere's
for the marbles.
Having lots of fun with the normals at the moment.
Cheers
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> I think the left one is much better. Glass is pretty resistant to
deformation,
> at a certain level of stress it'll just break.
Funny you should say that, I fiddled about with the one on the right that it
has now broken in half.
I guess the picture is now called " Red wins by K-O "
> 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.
Ah, so my memory wasn't lieing to me - the colours are more ribbon-like than
solid. At the moment I'm doing it by spinning three negative blobs about a
positive blob, then duplicating this shape, shorted but fatter and flipped
on it's axis of rotation. That way the colour on the top and bottom
inter-twines the color in the centre.
it might not be too much work to correct this (fatal last words).
Thanks V. much, I'll go back and play some more.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Richard Morton wrote:
> 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.
Hmm, that seems to be the concensus of opinion, and is the next bit I'm
going to try and fix.
Richard Morton continued:
> 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.
Oh ... Mine just has; the marble on the right is now two semi-marbles.
Richard Morton concluded
> Does anyone remember the names of the different types of marbles and their
> relative values.
Probably different depending on where you are. in 1981, Reindahlen JHQ in
Germany, I think we called the white ones china-whites. The big ones we
called two-ers. One-ers for your regular marble. There were also some tiny
little ones I think we called pee-wee's. Ballbearings were called just that.
Don't recall what the totally transparent ones were called but I seem to
recall them being worth twice the normal value when it came to swapping,
etc. Ballbearings also were double the value of a like-sized marble as I
recall - might have been more.
We used to play marbles with holes (i.e. holes in the ground - like golf,
not holes in the marbles) Charlie Brown always seems to play marbles in a
big circle, I would figure the points value is based on this circle type
version of marbles. I beleive the name of the game with this form of marbles
is to shoot your marble, and attempt to knock the others out of the ring.
You win however many you knock out, so I would think the points value is
based in the weight of the marble. Shoot a heavier marble to increase your
chance of knocking more marbles out, but with the risk of loosing a higher
points value if it doesn't come out itself.
Phew, all this marble talk is bringing it flooding back
Cheers.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bob H wrote
> 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.
I'd guess the colour would be down to low-quality glass, I imaging marble
factories buy the raw ... sand ? ... that is unsuitable for optical use.
> 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.
Any idea how they make them ? Glass marbles that is, not ceramic.
Thanks for your thoughts.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nekar Xenos wrote:
> 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....
Ah, actually this effect was quite intentional, I thought they did have air
trapped in there alongside the swirls. I've done it by making the swirls
slightly reflective as opposed to adjusting the IOR, but it'll be easy to
remove.
Once I've got some ribbon-type swirls, I'll try rendering without. On this
swirl-model it looks a bit flat without the white highlights inside the
marble.
Thanks for your thoughts.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Duncan Gray wrote:
> ...
>
> 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 ?
>
> ...
Hi
I consider your question very interesting. Even at work I found myself
trying to remember how used marble looked like. I make some tests and
bellow is the result. I think I came more or less close to what I
remember. Maybe it doesn't feet your needs, but if you are interested I
can post the code.
Alberto.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'mrbl.jpg' (50 KB)
Preview of image 'mrbl.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Duncan Gray wrote:
>
> 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 ?
^^^^^^^^
This-----------------------------------------------------'
--
Francois Labreque | //\\ Wear an ASCII ribbon!
flabreque | || ||
@ | \\// Support the campain
videotron.ca \\ against HTML e-mail
//\\ and news!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois Labreque wrote:
> Duncan Gray wrote:
> >
> > 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 ?
> ^^^^^^^^
> This-----------------------------------------------------'
I'm scared there are crazy people who don't cut cans of red paint open with
axes to find out what is inside.
--
Dan Johnson
http://www.geocities.com/zapob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alberto wrote:
> Duncan Gray wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > 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 ?
> >
> > ...
>
> Hi
>
> I consider your question very interesting. Even at work I found myself
> trying to remember how used marble looked like. I make some tests and
> bellow is the result. I think I came more or less close to what I
> remember. Maybe it doesn't feet your needs, but if you are interested I
> can post the code.
>
> Alberto.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [Image]
If only I had a digital camera I could send a picture of what an old marble
looks like. Oh wait I lost all my marbles.
--
Dan Johnson
http://www.geocities.com/zapob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Ah, actually this effect was quite intentional, I thought they did have
air
> trapped in there alongside the swirls. I've done it by making the swirls
> slightly reflective as opposed to adjusting the IOR, but it'll be easy to
> remove
Sorry, you were right. They do have that bubble-look. I think maybe not as
visible as your pic. and maybe a bit rounder,more bubbly look. I.m starting
to feel a bit guilty giving advice left and right, knowing how I have
trouble myself, just getting the atmosphere right or the transparency.
Nevertheless your marbles do look quite amazing.
Nekar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Uhhh .. Ohh ...
This would be wonderful ....
--
background{rgb 1}camera{location<1,5,-2>look_at 0}#macro m(a,b,i)#local
d=(b-a)/
8;#local
e=vcross(d,y);#if(i)m(a-e,a+e+2*d,i-1)m(a+e,a+2*d-e,i-1)m(a+3*d-e,a+e+3
*d,i-1)m(a+3*d-e,a+5*d-e,i-1)m(a+6*d-e,a+e+6*d,i-1)m(a+8*d-e,a+e+8*d,i-1)#el
se
cylinder{a,b,vlength(d)/3 pigment{rgb 0}}#end#end m(-4*x,2*x,4) // Jan
Walzer
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Dan Johnson wrote:
> I'm scared there are crazy people who don't cut cans of red paint open with
> axes to find out what is inside.
Damn straight.
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Dan Johnson wrote:
> If only I had a digital camera I could send a picture of what an old
> marble looks like. Oh wait I lost all my marbles.
Everyone at work is pretty much convinced I have (lost my marbles).
I have set several work colleges on a mission to creep into their kids
bedroom tonight and steal me some used marbles.
I didn't exlpain why I wanted them; that would spoil the fun.
Cheers.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois Labreque wrote:
> > What on earth possesed you to break open a can and find out ?
> ^^^^^^^^
> This-----------------------------------------------------'
Fair comment, I cant argue with that.
I do the same with electrical appliances:
a) If it works, I'll open up the case to find out how.
b) if it doesn't work, I'll open it up to find out why.
By strange co-incidence, my finding are nearly always the same:
a) Dont know - lots of chips and stuff.
b) Because I didn't put it back together again properly after operation a)
Cheers.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Dan Johnson wrote:
> I'm scared there are crazy people who don't cut cans of red paint open
with
> axes to find out what is inside.
At what point in this thread did the paint become RED, and when did the AXE
come into it ?
Now Dan, I'd like you to sit back and make yourself comfortable, relax and
try to think only nice, pleasant thoughts. Tell me:
Have you stopped chopping people up and putting them in the freezer ?
(YES/NO)
Wishing you a speedy recovery ;-)
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nekar Xenos:
> I.m starting to feel a bit guilty giving advice left and right, knowing
> how I have trouble myself, just getting the atmosphere right or the
> transparency.
I can't play a musical instrument, but I wont let that stop me from saying
'I like the melody in that song'. I value and appreciate your suggestions as
I do everyone else's - even the axe wielding ones (Dan) ;-)
And I am inclined to agree with you, the innner reflections should be more
bubble like rather than covering the entire swirly bit. But I confess, at
the moment I cannot think of how to go about doing this. I'll think on it
and see what I can come up with.
Thanks once again for your thoughts.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Duncan Gray" <dun### [at] eclipsecouk> wrote in message
news:3a91a041$1@news.povray.org...
>
> Any idea how they make them ? Glass marbles that is, not ceramic.
http://www.marblemuseum.org/articles/ribboncore.html about marble making
and
http://www.marblealan.com/reprohand/ which tells of the Atlanta Porcelain
marbles. Apparently they aren't genuine "marbles". :-( Disappointing but
I hardly paid anything for them. Another place tells of many other such
fakes in the marble collecting realm. I should have known :-) Well, these
I have just might be some kind of old porcelain anyway, painted over, from
some mill I read at one place. They have cracks and look old. Seems an
elaborate way to get 50 cents a piece. Guess I should have checked up on it
at the time but it was soon after the Olympics that I bought these at a
antiques store.
Bob H.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks Bob - thats great - just what I've been looking for.
Now why didn't altavista tell me about that.
Cheers
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thank you everyone for your comments and suggestions.
I'm fairly happy now with the surface or the marble (the chipped normal),
and though the swirly bits are still not quite right, they are much closer,
and I think I now have an algorythm will work, it's just a matter of tuning
the parameters a bit more. The colour of the marble has also been changed
slightly to give a greenish hue (thanks to those who suggested this, it does
I think improve the look)
Problem now is with the shadows which are being cast by the marble, looking
at the shadow of the broken marble nearest the camera - the JPEG-type effect
around the dark shadow I am happy with - this is caused by the area light,
and can be lessened up by increasing the number of elements in the area
light source (currently 5x5) and by adding the jitter keyword.
The bit which is concerning me is within the shadow of the semi-transparent
part of the marble, the colours are not blending well - it gives me the
impression of an image which has either been heavily compressed when
converting into JPG or an image which has been enlarged and smoothed,
neither of which are the case.
the light source is as follows:
light_source
lamp1_pos
color 1
area_light <3,0,0>,<0,0,3>,5,5
adaptive 1
spotlight
radius 3
falloff 6
point_at lamp1_tgt
}
Can anyone help me out with this little problem ? Am I doing something wrong
with this light source - I'm not sure if you are meant to combine area_light
and spot_light in a single light source, but I couldn't find anything to say
I cannot.
The tiles have a normal on them, though it is fairly subtle. they are
slightly reflective also, might these factors be contributing to the effect
?
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'marbles.jpg' (68 KB)
Preview of image 'marbles.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It looks pretty good. I'm not sure how marbles would fracture but i'm not gonna
get up roght now and go find out... the texturing is good and I see you fixed
the spirals :)
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
very nice, dunno if marbles do break cleanly in half - never really tried to
break one :)
--
Rick
POV-Ray News & Resources - http://povray.co.uk
Kitty5 WebDesign - http://kitty5.com
Hi-Impact web site design & database driven e-commerce
TEL : +44 (01625) 266358 - FAX : +44 (01625) 611913 - ICQ : 15776037
PGP Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
We used to fry 'em . . . place a few in a frying pan, get 'em hot
and quench them in cold water . . . great look and rarely did
they break on their own. However, some would break-up if
you dropped 'em after that. Try it . . . you'll like it :)
--
Y
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Fontaine wrote:
> It looks pretty good. I'm not sure how marbles would fracture but i'm
> not gonna get up roght now and go find out... the texturing is good and
> I see you fixed the spirals :)
Thank you.
The nature of the break is guess-work - I have never seen a marble break in
two, but I am assuming it would break something like sheet glass - on the
whole smoothly, but with rough jaggy patches.
Spirals are not finished with yet, but I think are a big improvement on my
initial attempt.
I think I've just solved my shadow problem as well - it's not the shadow;
it's the reflection in the tile. Doh !
Thanks again.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Finally I have the image to a point where I am happy to call it finished.
It has taken a while to render all the variants, but versions are now
available at 800x600, 1024x768 and 1152x864 for those who wanted them. I
have made available ZIP files containing the POV-Ray generated TGA files in
case you'd rather view the image without JPG compression artifacts. I have
ZIPed them, but they are still rather large.
Rather than post it all to the server, I have made them available on my own
web-site for download and just posted the 800x600 JPG version, the source is
also there for anyone who might like to investigate it.
<www.eclipse.co.uk/duncang/download/marb800.zip> 800x600 tga (725k)
<www.eclipse.co.uk/duncang/download/marb1024.zip> 1024x768 tga (1107k)
<www.eclipse.co.uk/duncang/download/marb1152.zip> 1152x864 tga (1335k)
<www.eclipse.co.uk/duncang/download/marb800.jpg> 800x600 jpg (70k)
<www.eclipse.co.uk/duncang/download/marb1024.jpg> 1024x768 jpg (102k)
<www.eclipse.co.uk/duncang/download/marb1152.jpg> 1152x864 jpg (122k)
<www.eclipse.co.uk/duncang/download/marb_src.zip> source code (4k)
Thanks for your suggestions and comments over the last week or so, I hope
like the final image is to your liking.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'marb800.jpg' (70 KB)
Preview of image 'marb800.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Very nice. Much more like the marbles of my misspent youth. Just a couple of
minor comments :
1) In the marbles that I have seen (as recently as last weekend), the
different coloured leaves are joined in the middle edge - this may well vary
across manufacturers.
2) The coloured leaves are too close to the top of the glass. This may just
be something to do with viewing angle but I would expect more of a gap.
"Duncan Gray" <dun### [at] eclipsecouk> wrote in message
news:3a99a36f@news.povray.org...
> Finally I have the image to a point where I am happy to call it finished.
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Richard Morton wrote:
> 1) In the marbles that I have seen (as recently as last weekend), the
> different coloured leaves are joined in the middle edge - this may well
vary
> across manufacturers.
> 2) The coloured leaves are too close to the top of the glass. This may
just
> be something to do with viewing angle but I would expect more of a gap.
Cheers.
During development, I did have the leaves meeting in the middle. I tried it
both ways and ended up using this version - for no particular reason. I got
tied up last wekend and didn't manage to go marble shopping so this image
has been built largely on suggestions from group, some pictures downloaded
from a marble museum, and a fading 20 year old memory of what a marble looks
like !
With respect to the swirly bits finishing too close to the top of the
marble, The marble has been tilted backwards (so that the swirly bits
receive some lighting from the main light-source). This does make the swirly
bits appear to touch the top of the marble, the refraction of the glass (IOR
1.2) also exaggerates the effect. I'll fix this at some time, but I think I
better get hold of a couple of marbles myself first to refresh my memory.
I hope you'll excuse me if I don't implement your suggestions
immediately -though I am sure you are correct in your observations
(especially with such recent marble experience). The image was meant to be a
couple of days light relief from my IRTC Anim entry and has managed to take
over a week now. I will re-visit the image at some point in the future but
for the moment I must resume my Anim or it won't be finished on time.
I just wanted to get the image to something I considered 'acceptably
complete' for myself, and the couple of people that requested it as a
wallpaper image (hence the links to lots of different sized versions).
Thanks again, and honest, one day I will correct the points you have raised.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>
> The nature of the break is guess-work - I have never seen a marble break in
> two, but I am assuming it would break something like sheet glass - on the
> whole smoothly, but with rough jaggy patches.
IIRC, glass typically breaks in what is called a conchoidal fracture. A
conchoidal fracture consists a a bunch of concentric rings and liiks a bit like
a shell. There is a (rathar poor quality) picture of such a fracture at
http://www.cobweb.net/~bug2/rock4.htm#FC
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler wrote:
> > The nature of the break is guess-work - I have never seen a marble break in
> > two, but I am assuming it would break something like sheet glass - on the
> > whole smoothly, but with rough jaggy patches.
>
> IIRC, glass typically breaks in what is called a conchoidal fracture. A
> conchoidal fracture consists a a bunch of concentric rings and liiks a bit like
> a shell. There is a (rathar poor quality) picture of such a fracture at
> http://www.cobweb.net/~bug2/rock4.htm#FC
That's what I was thinking, but I wasn't too sure. My mineral book is two flights
of stairs away too ;)
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Kevin Wampler wrote:
> IIRC, glass typically breaks in what is called a conchoidal fracture. A
> conchoidal fracture consists a a bunch of concentric rings and liiks a bit
like
> a shell. There is a (rathar poor quality) picture of such a fracture at
> http://www.cobweb.net/~bug2/rock4.htm#FC
As you read, I did think about the nature of the fracture, and tried to
reflect how I expected it to break. When I re-visit this scene after my Anim
entry is sorted, I will attempt to improve this aspect.
Cheers for providing me a link to check out, it's a shame the sample picture
doesn't show a larger area of fracture. I think I'll spend some time out in
the street with a bag of marbles and a hammer before re-tying the surface.
Thanks for your suggestions.
--
Duncan Gray
(warning: may contain traces of nut)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Careful down the stairs with that mineral book - it might shatter.
"David Fontaine" <dav### [at] faricynet> wrote in message
news:3A9B284F.24850F88@faricy.net...
> That's what I was thinking, but I wasn't too sure. My mineral book is two
flights
> of stairs away too ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
