Cheap Grass.

Pros:
- Practically no memory consumption.
- Can cover infinitely large areas, literally.
- Parsing: ~3 seconds.
- Rendering: Fast.

Cons:
- Not that realistic.
- No good for close-ups.
- No good for animations.

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated June 26)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'cheapgrass.jpg' (67 KB)

Preview of image 'cheapgrass.jpg'

I think the white and brownish lines are what give it away. That, and the
fact that there is no fuzziness on the horizon. Nice though. :)

Post a reply to this message

Is it an image map?

BTW why is it cheap? Shouldn't it be free?  ;o)

- Nekar

"Rune" <run### [at] mobilixnetdk> wrote in message
news:3babe982@news.povray.org...
> Cheap Grass.
>
> Pros:
> - Practically no memory consumption.
> - Can cover infinitely large areas, literally.
> - Parsing: ~3 seconds.
> - Rendering: Fast.
>
> Cons:
> - Not that realistic.
> - No good for close-ups.
> - No good for animations.
>
> Rune
> --
> 3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
> Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated June 26)
> POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
> POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 22 Sep 2001 03:25:54 +0200, Rune wrote:
>Cheap Grass.
>
>Pros:
>- Practically no memory consumption.
>- Can cover infinitely large areas, literally.
>- Parsing: ~3 seconds.
>- Rendering: Fast.
>
>Cons:
>- Not that realistic.
>- No good for close-ups.
>- No good for animations.

It does look good.  Hope you're going to source us. 

It looks like gras that's been recently cut and has 
dried out but stayed green.  

--
Cheers
Steve              email mailto:ste### [at] zeroppsuklinuxnet

%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee  0 pps. 

web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/

or  http://start.at/zero-pps

  9:40am  up 11 days, 11:54,  1 user,  load average: 1.16, 1.09, 1.03

Post a reply to this message

"Tony[B]" wrote:
> I think the white and brownish lines are what give it away.
> That, and the fact that there is no fuzziness on the horizon.

Perhaps the attached version is slightly better?

> Nice though. :)

Thanks! :)

Can anyone guess the trick I used?

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated June 26)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'cheapgrass2.jpg' (60 KB)

Preview of image 'cheapgrass2.jpg'

"Nekar Xenos" wrote:
> Is it an image map?

No image map, material map or similar used.

> BTW why is it cheap? Shouldn't it be free?  ;o)

Careful now, or it won't even be cheap anymore...! ;)

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated June 26)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

"Steve" wrote:
> It does look good.

Thanks!

> Hope you're going to source us.

In a little while.

> It looks like gras that's been recently cut and has
> dried out but stayed green.

I tried to make a fresher version which you can see in my reply to Tony[B].

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated June 26)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

"Rune" <run### [at] mobilixnetdk> wrote in message
news:3bacbd42@news.povray.org...
> "Tony[B]" wrote:
> > I think the white and brownish lines are what give it away.
> > That, and the fact that there is no fuzziness on the horizon.
>
> Perhaps the attached version is slightly better?
>
> > Nice though. :)
>
> Thanks! :)
>
> Can anyone guess the trick I used?

3.5 function pigment? Couldn't begin to guess the specific formula.
It occurs to me that maybe you could replace the darker colors with
transparency and use two copies of the ground stacked one above the
other for a little extra realism. What do you think?


--
Batronyx ^"^
bat### [at] cadronhsacom
http://www.batronyx.com

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 22 Sep 2001 17:47:43 +0200, "Rune"
<run### [at] mobilixnetdk> wrote:

>"Tony[B]" wrote:
>> I think the white and brownish lines are what give it away.
>> That, and the fact that there is no fuzziness on the horizon.
>
>Perhaps the attached version is slightly better?

I like these, but I think they look more like the texture of some
types of fur, carpet, or perhaps "Astro-turf", than actual grass. Have
you tried simulating any of these other materials, using this
technique  yet?

Later,
Glen

Post a reply to this message

Wasn't it Rune who wrote:

>Can anyone guess the trick I used?

If it's that fast it must just be a texture (either that or your
machine's a lot faster than mine). I'd guess something like this:

  pigment {leopard
    scale <0.01,1,0.1>
    turbulence <4,1,1> octaves 2 omega 1
    colour_map{[0 rgb 0][0.1 rgb <0,0.5,0>][0.5 rgb <0.9,1,0.9>]}  
    warp {turbulence <0.2,0.1,0.1>}
  }
-- 
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure

Post a reply to this message