 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks Ian. I'll give it a try.
Jim
"Ian Burgmyer" <the### [at] hotmail com> wrote in message
news:3b32cb61$1@news.povray.org...
> "Jim Kress" <kre### [at] kressworkscom> wrote in message
> news:3b32be05$1@news.povray.org...
> > Also, I am using version 3.1g.
>
> To improve the quality, btw, imcrease the number of samples up. I'd say
> samples 3,5 should work for what you're using. Just stick that into all
the
> media blocks you're using, and the effect should look real nice when
you're
> done.
>
> Prepare to leave your computer on overnight, though :-/
>
> -Ian
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ian,
OK. Tried your suggestion with megapov 0.7 The results are attached.
Media looks better except the top and both sides have been chopped off (or
left off). Any ideas what's going wrong or how to fix?
Thanks.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'rohf_density_001_mpov7.jpg' (29 KB)
Preview of image 'rohf_density_001_mpov7.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This was using
method 3
intervals 1
samples 3,5
confidence 0.999
variance 1/1000
Jim
"Jim Kress" <kre### [at] kressworkscom> wrote in message
news:3b32ce6e@news.povray.org...
> Ian,
>
> OK. Tried your suggestion with megapov 0.7 The results are attached.
>
> Media looks better except the top and both sides have been chopped off (or
> left off). Any ideas what's going wrong or how to fix?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here's another result using:
method 3
intervals 20
samples 3,5
confidence 0.999
variance 1/1000
What's going on with this? Looks like the sampling algorithm is not
behaving properly.
Jim
"Ian Burgmyer" <the### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:3b32cb61$1@news.povray.org...
> "Jim Kress" <kre### [at] kressworkscom> wrote in message
> news:3b32be05$1@news.povray.org...
> > Also, I am using version 3.1g.
>
> To improve the quality, btw, imcrease the number of samples up. I'd say
> samples 3,5 should work for what you're using. Just stick that into all
the
> media blocks you're using, and the effect should look real nice when
you're
> done.
>
> Prepare to leave your computer on overnight, though :-/
>
> -Ian
>
>
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'rohf_density_001_mpov7_2.jpg' (29 KB)
Preview of image 'rohf_density_001_mpov7_2.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Kress" <kre### [at] kressworkscom> wrote in message
news:3b32d0ba@news.povray.org...
> Here's another result using:
>
> method 3
> intervals 20
> samples 3,5
> confidence 0.999
> variance 1/1000
>
> What's going on with this? Looks like the sampling algorithm is not
> behaving properly.
I hadn't seen the number of layers your df3 might be made up of but that
intervals change suggests to me there are a few. Nathan Kopp has made the
method 3 somehow figure the intervals out on it's own (I'm guessing) and
maybe what you really need to do is increase the samples. I often use equal
numbers. Perhaps a samples 10,10 is okay for you? If not there's always
method 2 and samples 5,5 could possibly do well.
Bob H.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks. I'll give it a try.
Jim
"Bob H." <omn### [at] msncom> wrote in message
news:3b32f014@news.povray.org...
> "Jim Kress" <kre### [at] kressworkscom> wrote in message
> news:3b32d0ba@news.povray.org...
> > Here's another result using:
> >
> > method 3
> > intervals 20
> > samples 3,5
> > confidence 0.999
> > variance 1/1000
> >
> > What's going on with this? Looks like the sampling algorithm is not
> > behaving properly.
>
> I hadn't seen the number of layers your df3 might be made up of but that
> intervals change suggests to me there are a few. Nathan Kopp has made
the
> method 3 somehow figure the intervals out on it's own (I'm guessing) and
> maybe what you really need to do is increase the samples. I often use
equal
> numbers. Perhaps a samples 10,10 is okay for you? If not there's always
> method 2 and samples 5,5 could possibly do well.
>
> Bob H.
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
OK. It turns out that, although media is supposed to be contained within a
unit cube, it really isn't.
If you lok at my inc file, you'll see I used a unit cube box to contain the
media so it could be rendered. Well, if I change the box specification from
box{ <0,1>
to
box{ <0,0,-2>, <2,2,2>
the problem goes away, as one can see in the attached image. Hopefully this
does not indicate there is a bug in megapov.
Thanks for your suggestions!
Jim
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'rohf_density_001_5,5_samples_intervals_10_bounding_box_fixed.jpg' (27 KB)
Preview of image 'rohf_density_001_5,5_samples_intervals_10_bounding_box_fixed.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Kress" <kre### [at] kressworkscom> wrote in message
news:3b337f3b@news.povray.org...
> OK. It turns out that, although media is supposed to be contained within
a
> unit cube, it really isn't.
>
> If you lok at my inc file, you'll see I used a unit cube box to contain
the
> media so it could be rendered. Well, if I change the box specification
from
>
> box{ <0,1>
>
> to
>
> box{ <0,0,-2>, <2,2,2>
>
> the problem goes away, as one can see in the attached image. Hopefully
this
> does not indicate there is a bug in megapov.
I can't see that happening here, using spiral.df3 in place of your df3, the
media is contained within the 1 unit cube as described in the doc.
I thought perhaps it could be wave type but default is ramp_wave and looked
okay to me anyway. Most likely thing could be you are getting some sort of
perspective trouble. Make your box transmit 0.5 instead of 1 and you can
see where the sides are.
Bob H.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Kress wrote:
> Attached is a volumetric rendering using media. What is the best way
> (i.e. best quality for shortest rendering time) to get rid of the
> graininess and get nice, smooth colors?
I think it's quite pretty as is.
--
Anton Sherwood -- br0### [at] p0b0xcom -- http://ogre.nu/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks.
Jim
"Anton Sherwood" <bro### [at] poboxcom> wrote in message
news:3B3648D1.D868817C@pobox.com...
> Jim Kress wrote:
> > Attached is a volumetric rendering using media. What is the best way
> > (i.e. best quality for shortest rendering time) to get rid of the
> > graininess and get nice, smooth colors?
>
> I think it's quite pretty as is.
>
> --
> Anton Sherwood -- br0### [at] p0b0xcom -- http://ogre.nu/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
