 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmail com> wrote in message
news:3bc9e6cd@news.povray.org...
> No big changes. I just lowered transmit to 0.6 and added double_illuminate
> to both the candles. I also added an IOR of 1.1 to the wax. The scene is
> just for testing wax' behaviour in more complex scenes. This scene was
meant
> to be rendered with focal_blur, but 10 pps at the first lines (where there
> are no objects...) was too slow for me. Radiosity used. Render time: 3h
49m
> 5s.
> Forgot to say that a third candle was put behind the camera.
>
> Comments?
Fantastic. Might the refraction be causing the bright/dim midpoints of the
candles? It just looks like a gradient with slight turbulence though.
Bob H.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bob, you wrote:
> Fantastic.
Thanks!
>Might the refraction be causing the bright/dim midpoints of the
> candles? It just looks like a gradient with slight turbulence though.
Blob artifacts I think. I'll try sturm solver next time.
--
Jonathan.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Looks great! One thing I noted.. In each candle there appears to be a crack
in the wax. Now they could be there on purpose, or they could be something
unwanted. Thought I'd point them out to you. And as Tony requested, any
chance of seeing the source on this wonderful scene? :{)
David
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'cracks.jpg' (15 KB)
Preview of image 'cracks.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Incredible !!!.
It's always a pleasure to see your work, but this one is really fantastic.
Everything is perfect, the flames, the wax, the gold, the table...
Will you share the code?. I would like to learn how you did it.
(I'm on my knees right now ;-)
--
Txemi Jendrix
tji### [at] euskalnetnet
http://www.geocities.com/txemijendrix
news:3bc9e6cd@news.povray.org...
> No big changes. I just lowered transmit to 0.6 and added double_illuminate
> to both the candles. I also added an IOR of 1.1 to the wax. The scene is
> just for testing wax' behaviour in more complex scenes. This scene was
meant
> to be rendered with focal_blur, but 10 pps at the first lines (where there
> are no objects...) was too slow for me. Radiosity used. Render time: 3h
49m
> 5s.
> Forgot to say that a third candle was put behind the camera.
>
> Comments?
>
>
> p.s. Who knows who has put my binoculars there...
>
> --
> Jonathan.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Amazing! Good realism. That's some odd stemware though, looks like it
should be made of glass or else thicker and wider.
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricynet> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I love those flames.
Alf
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I guess they could be due to the candle behind the camera?
Alf
"David Heys" <sou### [at] gcinet> wrote in message
news:3bca0136@news.povray.org...
> Looks great! One thing I noted.. In each candle there appears to be
a crack
> in the wax. Now they could be there on purpose, or they could be
something
> unwanted. Thought I'd point them out to you. And as Tony requested,
any
> chance of seeing the source on this wonderful scene? :{)
>
> David
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:3bc9f7f6@news.povray.org...
> Bob, you wrote:
>
> >Might the refraction be causing the bright/dim midpoints of the
> > candles? It just looks like a gradient with slight turbulence though.
>
> Blob artifacts I think. I'll try sturm solver next time.
Seems you might have thought I meant the streams of blobs. Was talking
about what the others have brought up too.
Bob H.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I was dozing off when I heard Bob H. saying:
> "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
> news:3bc9f7f6@news.povray.org...
> > Bob, you wrote:
> >
> > >Might the refraction be causing the bright/dim midpoints of the
> > > candles? It just looks like a gradient with slight turbulence though.
> >
> > Blob artifacts I think. I'll try sturm solver next time.
>
> Seems you might have thought I meant the streams of blobs. Was talking
> about what the others have brought up too.
Nope. I completely understood you.
Without rad. and with sturm I cannot notice those artifacts anymore.
--
Jonathan.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message news:3bc9e6cd@news.povray.org...
> No big changes. I just lowered transmit to 0.6 and added double_illuminate
> to both the candles. I also added an IOR of 1.1 to the wax. The scene is
> just for testing wax' behaviour in more complex scenes. This scene was meant
> to be rendered with focal_blur, but 10 pps at the first lines (where there
> are no objects...) was too slow for me. Radiosity used. Render time: 3h 49m
> 5s.
> Forgot to say that a third candle was put behind the camera.
>
> Comments?
>
>
Amazing! I love the candles, and the candle holder texture is marvelous. The
table's not bad either. Ok... I like everything except the glass... it looks a
little rough.
Michael
--
#macro M(D)#local J=strlen(D);#local _=""#while(J>0)#local _=concat(_,substr(D
,J,1))#local J=J-1;#end _#end sphere{z*9,5pigment{rgb x}}#macro N(D,J)text{ttf
"timrom.ttf"M(D)1,0 translate-J}#end#macro O(E,K)#local _=N(E,K)light_source{-
z*9rgb 1projected_through{_}}#end O("leahciM"<1.6,-.3.9>)O("nosnhoJ"<1.6.9.9>)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
