Since there was some request i made an isosurface version of the water
simulation i posted in p.b.a.  It's much slower so not very nice for
animating, this picture took 4h30min to render.

Since there are only 40 sine waves, it look a bit too regular, but with
more it would have been even slower.

The code is posted in p.b.s-f.

Christoph

-- 
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other 
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'waves_test02a.jpg' (34 KB)

Preview of image 'waves_test02a.jpg'

"Christoph Hormann" <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3BFE8F2A.CA3E4E46@gmx.de...
>
> Since there was some request i made an isosurface version of the water
> simulation i posted in p.b.a.  It's much slower so not very nice for
> animating, this picture took 4h30min to render.
>
> Since there are only 40 sine waves, it look a bit too regular, but with
> more it would have been even slower.

    That 'is' nice Christoph. I've been swimming and fishing in that sea!

>
> The code is posted in p.b.s-f.

     Thanks!

    ~Steve~



>
> Christoph
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
> IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
> things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

Post a reply to this message

Christoph Hormann wrote
> Since there was some request i made an isosurface version of the water
> simulation i posted in p.b.a.

Much obliged

>It's much slower so not very nice for
> animating, this picture took 4h30min to render.

Only 4 minutes 44 seconds for a 160*120 with no AA on my comp.
I might try the animation <g>

> Since there are only 40 sine waves, it look a bit too regular, but with
> more it would have been even slower.

I don't think it looks too regular. It's amazing what you can simulate
with "simple" math (OK maybe not that simple).

So if I wanted to add more waves I'd change MAX_WAVES in waves.inc
and for the animation I'd put clock in the 3rd parameter of Waves function
call in the .pov file?

-Jide

Post a reply to this message

> I don't think it looks too regular. It's amazing what you can simulate
> with "simple" math (OK maybe not that simple).

I looked at the code.. Relative simple math??  No no no no.. How dare you!
I wish I could understand these things...

But wouldn't it be very easy to distort the regularity without adding more
sines, but with a normal modifier or warp... That *would* be simple.

Hugo

Post a reply to this message

Hugo wrote
> I looked at the code.. Relative simple math??  No no no no.. How dare you!
> I wish I could understand these things...

Hehe. That makes two of us (for a start atleast)

> But wouldn't it be very easy to distort the regularity without adding more
> sines, but with a normal modifier or warp... That *would* be simple.

Yes and if large masses of water aren't needed you can just use function n,n
in
a heightfield and then increasing the number of sines doesn't matter that
much
rendertimewise.

-Jide

Post a reply to this message

Hugo wrote:
> 
> But wouldn't it be very easy to distort the regularity without adding more
> sines, but with a normal modifier or warp... That *would* be simple.
> 

Yes, using a scaled noise3d would be fairly simple too and would not look
that different, but it would not be good to animate and it won't be
physicallyy realistic either.

Christoph

-- 
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other 
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message