 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Just experimenting with creating blurred reflections. Comments?
-tgq
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'Blurred.jpg' (49 KB)
Preview of image 'Blurred.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Trevor Quayle wrote:
> Just experimenting with creating blurred reflections. Comments?
3.5 is NOT MegaPOV ; }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In this scene it looks pretty good, I must say. What are your aa settings
for that? Do you think this would work in every scene? Is the amount of
blurring *tunable* (sp?) ? The non-faked highlights look perfect.
--
Jonathan.
"Trevor Quayle" <Tin### [at] hotmail com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:3bcc9c7c@news.povray.org...
> Just experimenting with creating blurred reflections. Comments?
>
> -tgq
>
>
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
...which is the interesting thing. Trevor did not use MegaPov, but simulated
blurred reflections with normals (I guess).
--
Jonathan.
"Dave Dunn" <poi### [at] aolcom> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:3BCC9E52.F0D5360A@aol.com...
>
>
> Trevor Quayle wrote:
>
> > Just experimenting with creating blurred reflections. Comments?
>
> 3.5 is NOT MegaPOV ; }
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
JRG wrote:
> ...which is the interesting thing. Trevor did not use MegaPov, but simulated
> blurred reflections with normals (I guess).
Someone was just saying that the best jokes always fall flat...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Uh? Sorry, I don't know why, but I didn't get it before... next time I will
check every ; } more than once before answering.
;)
--
Jonathan.
"Dave Dunn" <poi### [at] aolcom> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:3BCC9F82.16E6EC98@aol.com...
>
>
> JRG wrote:
>
> > ...which is the interesting thing. Trevor did not use MegaPov, but
simulated
> > blurred reflections with normals (I guess).
>
> Someone was just saying that the best jokes always fall flat...
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Dave Dunn" <poi### [at] aolcom> wrote in message
news:3BCC9F82.16E6EC98@aol.com...
>
>
> JRG wrote:
>
> > ...which is the interesting thing. Trevor did not use MegaPov, but
simulated
> > blurred reflections with normals (I guess).
>
> Someone was just saying that the best jokes always fall flat...
Jokes like that are no good unless someone doesn't get them.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
JRG wrote:
> Uh? Sorry, I don't know why, but I didn't get it before... next time I will
> check every ; } more than once before answering.
> ;)
Seriously, it was a pretty amazing attempt to recreate one of my fave MegaPOV
features (which was the point since it didn't make its way into 3.5), and I
shouldn't have diminished the effort by horsing around. BTW, how was it done? I
am guessing a small amount of granite scaled verrrrry small...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
AA Setting were as follows: Threshold 0.01, Method 2, Recursion 4
I have been trying to play with it but it is very hard to get rid of
artifacts even with really high AA settings. This one used the bumps
normal, fresnel reflection and metallic reflection. One of the problems
that can be slightly noticed is that at shallow angles, the blurred
reflection breaks down (i.e., becomes clearer, less blurred. I don't think
this reflects reality), I think this is beacause of the nature of normals.
I have been experimenting all around with super-realism, trying to use
reflection instead of specular highlighting and not using ambient lighting
(except as light sources) among other things.
Lots more work to do though.
-tgq
"JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:3bcc9e4e@news.povray.org...
> In this scene it looks pretty good, I must say. What are your aa settings
> for that? Do you think this would work in every scene? Is the amount of
> blurring *tunable* (sp?) ? The non-faked highlights look perfect.
>
> --
> Jonathan.
>
> "Trevor Quayle" <Tin### [at] hotmailcom> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:3bcc9c7c@news.povray.org...
> > Just experimenting with creating blurred reflections. Comments?
> >
> > -tgq
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
verry nice, it looks like something with fine frost on it.
Gary
Trevor Quayle <Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:3bcc9c7c@news.povray.org...
> Just experimenting with creating blurred reflections. Comments?
>
> -tgq
>
>
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Can you do blurred transmission too?
_____________
Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Do you mean like this?
-tgq
"Kari Kivisalo" <ray### [at] engineercom> wrote in message
news:3BCD892B.2AAF86F8@engineer.com...
>
> Can you do blurred transmission too?
>
> _____________
> Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'Sheet.jpg' (66 KB)
Preview of image 'Sheet.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Trevor Quayle wrote:
>
> Do you mean like this?
Yes. Another key step towards realism :) I had plans to try
this with multiple averaged bumps at different base frequencies
but never got around calculating the required contributions
and scale factors.
_____________
Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 18:42:19 +0300, Kari Kivisalo wrote:
>Trevor Quayle wrote:
>>
>> Do you mean like this?
>
>Yes. Another key step towards realism :) I had plans to try
>this with multiple averaged bumps at different base frequencies
>but never got around calculating the required contributions
>and scale factors.
Besides blurred transmission, there's another cool benefit to this method:
anisotropic blurring.
The first picture has no blurring.
The second picture has isotropic blurring.
The third picture has anisotropic blurring; the bumps are much taller than
they are wide. In a way, the cylinder has lots of vertical microscratches.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'blur-none.jpg' (51 KB)
Download 'blur-isotropic.jpg' (33 KB)
Download 'blur-anisotropic.jpg' (38 KB)
Preview of image 'blur-none.jpg'
Preview of image 'blur-isotropic.jpg'
Preview of image 'blur-anisotropic.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ron Parker wrote:
>
> anisotropic blurring.
Didn't someone ask about brushed/machined metal textures?
Let's see some :)
_____________
Kari Kivisalo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 21:30:23 +0300, Kari Kivisalo wrote:
>Ron Parker wrote:
>>
>> anisotropic blurring.
>
>Didn't someone ask about brushed/machined metal textures?
>Let's see some :)
Well, the downside of this is that it requires antialiasing for the whole
scene. In my case, I rendered with +a0.0 +am2 +r5, which takes forever
even for that size image even on an Athlon 1.4GHz.
--
#macro R(P)z+_(P)_(P)_(P+1)_(P+1)+z#end#macro Q(C)bicubic_patch{type 1u_steps 6
v_steps 6R(1)R(3)R(5)R(7)translate 9*z-2pigment{rgb z}}#end#macro _(Y)#local X=
asc(substr(C,Y,1))-65;<mod(X,4)div(X,4)>#end#local O=union{Q("ABEFUQWS")Q(// RON
"WSXTLOJN")}Q("JNKLCGCD")union{O}union{O translate 3*x}light_source{x 1}//PARKER
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:slr### [at] fwicom...
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 21:30:23 +0300, Kari Kivisalo wrote:
> >Ron Parker wrote:
> >>
> >> anisotropic blurring.
> >
> >Didn't someone ask about brushed/machined metal textures?
> >Let's see some :)
>
> Well, the downside of this is that it requires antialiasing for the whole
> scene. In my case, I rendered with +a0.0 +am2 +r5, which takes forever
> even for that size image even on an Athlon 1.4GHz.
...which too bad does not make it likely to be used in *real* scenes :-(
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 20:34:36 +0200, JRG wrote:
>"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> ha scritto nel messaggio
>news:slr### [at] fwicom...
>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 21:30:23 +0300, Kari Kivisalo wrote:
>> >Ron Parker wrote:
>> >>
>> >> anisotropic blurring.
>> >
>> >Didn't someone ask about brushed/machined metal textures?
>> >Let's see some :)
>>
>> Well, the downside of this is that it requires antialiasing for the whole
>> scene. In my case, I rendered with +a0.0 +am2 +r5, which takes forever
>> even for that size image even on an Athlon 1.4GHz.
>
>...which too bad does not make it likely to be used in *real* scenes :-(
Here's another one, with slightly less blurring because I rendered it on
my P200 rather than my Athlon. It's notable for the jaggy lines in the
checkerboard floor...
Rendered with a development build of 3.5, but with a custom patch. Whether
that patch makes it into 3.5 or into the next MegaPOV is something I need to
discuss with some people. Render time was 4:32, which isn't bad for a P200.
The cylinder was supersampled 25 times per ray (vs. 1089 for the images I
posted before.)
So what's so special about this patch compared to the old reflection blur?
Well, let's just say it's not limited to reflection, shall we?
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'jb.jpg' (20 KB)
Preview of image 'jb.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:slr### [at] fwicom...
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 20:34:36 +0200, JRG wrote:
> >"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> ha scritto nel messaggio
> >news:slr### [at] fwicom...
> >> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 21:30:23 +0300, Kari Kivisalo wrote:
> >> >Ron Parker wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> anisotropic blurring.
> >> >
> >> >Didn't someone ask about brushed/machined metal textures?
> >> >Let's see some :)
> >>
> >> Well, the downside of this is that it requires antialiasing for the
whole
> >> scene. In my case, I rendered with +a0.0 +am2 +r5, which takes forever
> >> even for that size image even on an Athlon 1.4GHz.
> >
> >...which too bad does not make it likely to be used in *real* scenes :-(
>
> Here's another one, with slightly less blurring because I rendered it on
> my P200 rather than my Athlon. It's notable for the jaggy lines in the
> checkerboard floor...
>
> Rendered with a development build of 3.5, but with a custom patch.
Whether
> that patch makes it into 3.5 or into the next MegaPOV is something I need
to
> discuss with some people. Render time was 4:32, which isn't bad for a
P200.
> The cylinder was supersampled 25 times per ray (vs. 1089 for the images I
> posted before.)
>
> So what's so special about this patch compared to the old reflection blur?
> Well, let's just say it's not limited to reflection, shall we?
*droooooooling* :-|_
(something like stochastic raytracing?)
--
Jonathan.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 22:43:44 +0200, JRG wrote:
>> So what's so special about this patch compared to the old reflection blur?
>> Well, let's just say it's not limited to reflection, shall we?
>
>(something like stochastic raytracing?)
Sort of. I've added a "supersample n,d" statement to the finish statement,
which causes POV to evaluate the texture n times while jittering the normal's
evaluation point within d of the actual evaluation point. That means that,
if you have the CPU horsepower, you can do blurred isotropic reflection as
with the old patch, but also blurred anisotropic reflection, both kinds of
transmission, and maybe even real specular highlights, just by adding a
very small-scale normal to the surface.
I, of course, don't have that kind of horsepower. But here's a sample of
blurred transmission that was within reach of my limited CPU. The stats
are included for the curious:
Done Tracing
Statistics for blur.pov, Resolution 320 x 240
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pixels: 76800 Samples: 76800 Smpls/Pxl: 1.00
Rays: 1395150 Saved: 0 Max Level: 3/5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ray->Shape Intersection Tests Succeeded Percentage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Box 2726599 1054773 38.68
Cone/Cylinder 10906396 22138 0.20
Plane 5453198 2035619 37.33
Sphere 2726599 2726599 100.00
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calls to Noise: 5679714 Calls to DNoise: 6998074
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shadow Ray Tests: 10651592 Succeeded: 794019
Refracted Rays: 1318350
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smallest Alloc: 16 bytes Largest: 12040
Peak memory used: 94390 bytes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time For Trace: 0 hours 7 minutes 26.0 seconds (446 seconds)
Total Time: 0 hours 7 minutes 26.0 seconds (446 seconds)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'blur3.jpg' (21 KB)
Preview of image 'blur3.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Drroooool.... Ron, at least set things up to put it in the next MegaPOV...
pleeease... :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:slr### [at] fwicom...
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 22:43:44 +0200, JRG wrote:
> >> So what's so special about this patch compared to the old reflection
blur?
> >> Well, let's just say it's not limited to reflection, shall we?
> >
> >(something like stochastic raytracing?)
>
> Sort of. I've added a "supersample n,d" statement to the finish
statement,
> which causes POV to evaluate the texture n times while jittering the
normal's
> evaluation point within d of the actual evaluation point. That means
that,
> if you have the CPU horsepower, you can do blurred isotropic reflection as
> with the old patch, but also blurred anisotropic reflection, both kinds of
> transmission, and maybe even real specular highlights, just by adding a
> very small-scale normal to the surface.
This surely has lots of applications... any chance to see it either in the
official release or in the next versions of MegaPov? (pleonastic
question...)
--
Jonathan.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 23:23:41 +0200, JRG wrote:
>This surely has lots of applications... any chance to see it either in the
>official release or in the next versions of MegaPov? (pleonastic
>question...)
I'll make sure it at least gets in the next (3.5) version of MegaPOV. No
guarantees about 3.5, because it's technically in feature lock.
--
#macro R(L P)sphere{L F}cylinder{L P F}#end#macro P(V)merge{R(z+a z)R(-z a-z)R(a
-z-z-z a+z)torus{1F clipped_by{plane{a 0}}}translate V}#end#macro Z(a F T)merge{
P(z+a)P(z-a)R(-z-z-x a)pigment{rgbf 1}hollow interior{media{emission 3-T}}}#end
Z(-x-x.2x)camera{location z*-10rotate x*90normal{bumps.02scale.05}}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:slr### [at] fwicom...
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 23:23:41 +0200, JRG wrote:
> >This surely has lots of applications... any chance to see it either in
the
> >official release or in the next versions of MegaPov? (pleonastic
> >question...)
>
> I'll make sure it at least gets in the next (3.5) version of MegaPOV. No
> guarantees about 3.5, because it's technically in feature lock.
Uh? From 0.7 to 3.5 will be a *giant* upgrade ;)
--
Jonathan.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 23:36:50 +0200, JRG wrote:
>"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> ha scritto nel messaggio
>news:slr### [at] fwicom...
>> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 23:23:41 +0200, JRG wrote:
>> >This surely has lots of applications... any chance to see it either in
>the
>> >official release or in the next versions of MegaPov? (pleonastic
>> >question...)
>>
>> I'll make sure it at least gets in the next (3.5) version of MegaPOV. No
>> guarantees about 3.5, because it's technically in feature lock.
>
>Uh? From 0.7 to 3.5 will be a *giant* upgrade ;)
I meant, the next version based on the official 3.5.
--
#macro R(P)z+_(P)_(P)_(P+1)_(P+1)+z#end#macro Q(C)bicubic_patch{type 1u_steps 6
v_steps 6R(1)R(3)R(5)R(7)translate 9*z-2pigment{rgb z}}#end#macro _(Y)#local X=
asc(substr(C,Y,1))-65;<mod(X,4)div(X,4)>#end#local O=union{Q("ABEFUQWS")Q(// RON
"WSXTLOJN")}Q("JNKLCGCD")union{O}union{O translate 3*x}light_source{x 1}//PARKER
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ron Parker wrote:
>
> On Wed, 17 Oct 2001 22:43:44 +0200, JRG wrote:
> >> So what's so special about this patch compared to the old reflection blur?
> >> Well, let's just say it's not limited to reflection, shall we?
> >
> >(something like stochastic raytracing?)
>
> Sort of. I've added a "supersample n,d" statement to the finish statement,
> which causes POV to evaluate the texture n times while jittering the normal's
> evaluation point within d of the actual evaluation point.
Wouldn't it make sense to use something more geometric than a random
jitter? Or does that cause artifacts or something? (Of course, you would
then need at least, I dunno, four or five samples to get reasonable
results, but you'd need at least that many anyway...)
-Xplo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001 10:37:21 -0700, Xplo Eristotle wrote:
>Wouldn't it make sense to use something more geometric than a random
>jitter? Or does that cause artifacts or something? (Of course, you would
>then need at least, I dunno, four or five samples to get reasonable
>results, but you'd need at least that many anyway...)
Well, mathematically I don't see that there'd be much difference in the
two methods, since the underlying normal is itself likely to be somewhat
random. Adaptive jitter might lead to a more ordered approach, though.
This morning I finished rendering a "real" test image, an anisotropic
blurred transmission test. At 512x384, with 33 samples per intersection
(but two surfaces to the box, so really 1089 samples per pixel, it took
just under 12 hours to render on my P200 but the results were beautiful.
In other news, I thought of a way to get true blurred reflection without
a custom patch; it just requires one little bugfix in 3.5 and a seriously
layered texture.
--
#local R=<7084844682857967,0787982,826975826580>;#macro L(P)concat(#while(P)chr(
mod(P,100)),#local P=P/100;#end"")#end background{rgb 1}text{ttf L(R.x)L(R.y)0,0
translate<-.8,0,-1>}text{ttf L(R.x)L(R.z)0,0translate<-1.6,-.75,-1>}sphere{z/9e3
4/26/2001finish{reflection 1}}//ron.parker@povray.org My opinions, nobody else's
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message news:3bcdf6ec$1@news.povray.org...
> ... (pleonastic
> question...)
>
> --
> Jonathan.
*grin* Learn something new every day.
Michael
--
camera{location<8,20>look_at<6,0,4>}light_source{<8,8>rgb 1}difference{union{
#macro M(D,J)#local R=asc(substr(D,J,1))-32;<div(R,10)*2,mod(R,10)>#end#macro
E(D,B,R)prism{-D,4+D,R#local C=1;#while(C<R+1)M(B,C)#local C=C+1;#end}#end E(
0," (2:FPKAD80* U_dZU"18)sphere{2,2}#macro T(N)cylinder{<9,-N,3><9,4+N,3>3-N}
#end T(0)}T(2)E(1"45LNXUK4"8)pigment{rgb x+y/2}}//(c)2001 MDJohnson(Redbeard)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Uh?
"Redbeard (MDJohnson)" <red### [at] wvadelphianet> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:3bd18b47@news.povray.org...
>
> "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:3bcdf6ec$1@news.povray.org...
> > ... (pleonastic
> > question...)
> >
> > --
> > Jonathan.
>
> *grin* Learn something new every day.
>
> Michael
> --
> camera{location<8,20>look_at<6,0,4>}light_source{<8,8>rgb
1}difference{union{
> #macro M(D,J)#local
R=asc(substr(D,J,1))-32;<div(R,10)*2,mod(R,10)>#end#macro
> E(D,B,R)prism{-D,4+D,R#local C=1;#while(C<R+1)M(B,C)#local C=C+1;#end}#end
E(
> 0," (2:FPKAD80* U_dZU"18)sphere{2,2}#macro
T(N)cylinder{<9,-N,3><9,4+N,3>3-N}
> #end T(0)}T(2)E(1"45LNXUK4"8)pigment{rgb x+y/2}}//(c)2001
MDJohnson(Redbeard)
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Never heard the word 'pleonastic' before.
"JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message news:3bd303e3@news.povray.org...
> Uh?
>
> "Redbeard (MDJohnson)" <red### [at] wvadelphianet> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:3bd18b47@news.povray.org...
> >
> > "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
> news:3bcdf6ec$1@news.povray.org...
> > > ... (pleonastic
> > > question...)
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jonathan.
> >
> > *grin* Learn something new every day.
> >
> > Michael
> > --
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
