Anyone ever managed to create realistic looking people in Povray? Could you post some
examples
of the "state-of-the-art"? Just wondering if it's possible to do with practice....

David

Post a reply to this message

David Findlay <dav### [at] yahoocomau> wrote in message
news:3bff74c1$1@news.povray.org...
> Anyone ever managed to create realistic looking people in Povray? Could
you post some examples
> of the "state-of-the-art"? Just wondering if it's possible to do with
practice....
>
> David


I'm working on it.  Here's what I have so far.  Definitely a "Work In
Progress"

It started as a dragon model that I was able to make look human-like by
playing with the parameters.

I intend to improve the chest and the limbs to have better muscle
definition.

I've included images of both dragon and human.

--
Tom

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'Dragon.jpg' (32 KB) Download 'Human.jpg' (26 KB)

Preview of image 'Dragon.jpg'

Preview of image 'Human.jpg'

Nice Dragon!
I like his pose. :)

Best Regards

Post a reply to this message

I have three images from quite a while ago (1997 is the date on the files)
that I got from Compuserve. I do not remember who posted the images but for
some reason I don't think it was the guy who actually created them. The
images are of a woman (he) called Sadie and they were very good back then
and still look very good today... I was just looking at them. He said that
he (the guy that was working on them) was trying to make a completely
posable version for possible use in a movie.
That's how I recall the thread anyway. I could have dreamed it all up and it
could all be just a figment of the evil, twisted side of my imagination.
I don't think I should post the pictures because they are not mine and there
is noodity involved. If you you're over hmmm, let's say 26 and can prove it,
I'll email you the pictures.

Pez

Post a reply to this message

"David Findlay" <dav### [at] yahoocomau> wrote in message
news:3bff74c1$1@news.povray.org...

Check out Giles Tran's site (http://www.oyonale.com/)

For realistic figures, you really need to invest in Poser and export the meshes
to POV.

Post a reply to this message

Tom Melly wrote:
> For realistic figures, you really need to invest
> in Poser and export the meshes to POV.

Poser?  Realistic?

*falls down laughing*

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

"Timothy R. Cook" <tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom> wrote in message
news:3C0211A7.476B54F3@scifi-fantasy.com...
> Tom Melly wrote:
> > For realistic figures, you really need to invest
> > in Poser and export the meshes to POV.
>
> Poser?  Realistic?
>
> *falls down laughing*
>

BTW, anyone know if Character Studio is more realistic than Poser? I heard you
can actually design your own creatures with it. I heard something about muscle
modelling and skin stretching in Character Studio. Sounds pretty good. Never had
the money for it though.

--
- Nekar

http://nekar_xenos.tripod.com/metanoia/



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.298 / Virus Database: 161 - Release Date: 2001/11/13

Post a reply to this message

"Timothy R. Cook" <tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom> wrote :
>
> Poser?  Realistic?
>
> *falls down laughing*

    Did you look at Giles site? Did you see "Eve"? Are you still laughing?

Post a reply to this message

"Timothy R. Cook" <tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom> wrote in message
news:3C0211A7.476B54F3@scifi-fantasy.com...
> Tom Melly wrote:
> > For realistic figures, you really need to invest
> > in Poser and export the meshes to POV.
>
> Poser?  Realistic?
>
> *falls down laughing*
>

Not entirely sure what the joke is....

Post a reply to this message

Bill DeWitt wrote:
> Did you look at Giles site?
> Did you see "Eve"?
> Are you still laughing?

No, no, yes.  In that order.

...the reason I'm laughing is because I have Poser 4,
and I cringe when I take the figure and raise the arm
above the head.  Deltoid and pectoral don't bend from
static positions.  They themselves change shape.  A
quick-and-dirty fix for that would be to have body
data for muscle-flexed positions and morph to those,
and a better fix would be to actually manipulate the
skin as though the muscles were acting.  But just
bending one dataset as though it were plastic?  No.
That's not even taking into consideration flesh
being pushed around by other chunks of flesh as in
the inside of the elbow when the arm is flexed.

I'll stop laughing/sobbing when those things are
corrected.  And they're not minor cosmetic issues.
They're integral into making a figure look real.
In fact, you can have a stick figure look more
realistic than a poser figure if you give it
basic muscle groups that move properly.

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

"Timothy R. Cook" <tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom> wrote in message
news:3C0239BB.D354E6FE@scifi-fantasy.com...
> Bill DeWitt wrote:
> > Did you look at Giles site?
> > Did you see "Eve"?
> > Are you still laughing?
>
> No, no, yes.  In that order.
>
> ...the reason I'm laughing is because I have Poser 4,
> and I cringe when I take the figure and raise the arm
> above the head.  Deltoid and pectoral don't bend from
> static positions.  They themselves change shape.  A
> quick-and-dirty fix for that would be to have body
> data for muscle-flexed positions and morph to those,


    You seem to be talking about animation, since this is a still image
group I didn't expect that.

    I don't have Poser 4, but having tried out 3, I assume that you have to
move the shoulder and other parts of the body to make more natural
movements.

    Realism in movement probably takes tedium and skill, realism in static
poses takes texture mapping and Giles can probably help you with that.

Post a reply to this message

Bill DeWitt wrote:
> You seem to be talking about animation, since
> this is a still image group I didn't expect that.

No, I'm talking about still images.  In order to
make pose Z which is somewhere between poses A
and B, you can either stretch they daylights out
of pose A, or you can average the datasets of A
and B.

> Realism in movement probably takes tedium and
> skill, realism in static poses takes texture
> mapping and Giles can probably help you with that.

Texture mapping?  Look at the attached image.  I
don't care WHAT texture you slap on it, it's not
going to look right; the geometry is flat out
wrong.

(Realism in movement takes a few hundred thousand
dollars to afford a motion capture system, then
the know-how to clean up the end data...unless
you have a lot of time on your hands and really
detailed knowledge of anatomy)
-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'junk.jpg' (19 KB)

Preview of image 'junk.jpg'

As Bill said:
"I don't have Poser 4, but having tried out 3, I assume that you have to
move the shoulder and other parts of the body to make more natural
movements."

I agree with him here. In Poser 3 I wanted to do a similar pose some time ago.
You have to rotate the shoulders up as well. Try and move your own arm up
vertically in real life without moving your shoulder and you'll see for
yourself.


--
- Nekar

http://nekar_xenos.tripod.com/metanoia/

"Timothy R. Cook" <tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom> wrote in message
news:3C023F30.A735E391@scifi-fantasy.com...
> Bill DeWitt wrote:
> > You seem to be talking about animation, since
> > this is a still image group I didn't expect that.
>
> No, I'm talking about still images.  In order to
> make pose Z which is somewhere between poses A
> and B, you can either stretch they daylights out
> of pose A, or you can average the datasets of A
> and B.
>
> > Realism in movement probably takes tedium and
> > skill, realism in static poses takes texture
> > mapping and Giles can probably help you with that.
>
> Texture mapping?  Look at the attached image.  I
> don't care WHAT texture you slap on it, it's not
> going to look right; the geometry is flat out
> wrong.
>
> (Realism in movement takes a few hundred thousand
> dollars to afford a motion capture system, then
> the know-how to clean up the end data...unless
> you have a lot of time on your hands and really
> detailed knowledge of anatomy)
> --
> Tim Cook
> http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com
>
> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
> Version: 3.12
> GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
> N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
> PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
> D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------


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





---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.298 / Virus Database: 161 - Release Date: 2001/11/13

Post a reply to this message

Nekar Xenos wrote:
> You have to rotate the shoulders up as well.
> Try and move your own arm up vertically in
> real life without moving your shoulder and
> you'll see for yourself.

A bit of a limitation of Poser 4; in the image
I attached, the part labelled 'right collar' is
rotated, and the next part, 'right upper arm'
is then rotated.
-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

"Timothy R. Cook" <tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom> wrote in message
news:3C023F30.A735E391@scifi-fantasy.com...
> Bill DeWitt wrote:
> > You seem to be talking about animation, since
> > this is a still image group I didn't expect that.
>
> No, I'm talking about still images.  In order to
> make pose Z which is somewhere between poses A
> and B, you can either stretch they daylights out
> of pose A, or you can average the datasets of A
> and B.

    Have it your way.

Post a reply to this message

I also own Poser versions 1 through 4 and (I'm not trying to put words in
anyones mouth but) I think what these guys are trying to say is that Poser
isn't the worst program in the world for creating life-like figures (or
animals, creatures, robots, etc) in a quick and dirty way but it isn't as
good at creating models as the pro's are.
Almost all of the really good looking Poser images have been retouched in a
paint program (some - pick me, pick me, consider this to be cheating). Yes,
the Victoria model is pretty good, no, she doesn't look human.

Here's a site with some pretty good Poser images... all retouched, and a few
tutorials.
http://www.earthcurves.com/art/images.htm

Here's the real deal.
http://www.erc.msstate.edu/~camen/thehumanhead/gallery.html

Pez

Post a reply to this message

Rocket Jock wrote:
> Almost all of the really good looking Poser
> images have been retouched in a paint program
> (some - pick me, pick me, consider this to be
> cheating).

If you can't do everything you need to do on
the first render pass, what's the point of
using a renderer?  If you're gonna retouch it,
make the whole bloody thing in your paint
program. ;)  "One program per image!"

> Here's a site with some pretty good Poser images...
> all retouched, and a few tutorials.

Hmm ok, Poser can emulate one thing accurately;
the 'Birth of Venus' broken-neck look. ;P

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 11:47:29 -0500, Timothy R. Cook wrote:
> If you can't do everything you need to do on
> the first render pass, what's the point of
> using a renderer?  If you're gonna retouch it,
> make the whole bloody thing in your paint
> program. ;)  "One program per image!"

That's a pretty provincial attitude.  I can't see it being a useful
attitude for anything but the IRTC or the digital photo contest or 
something like that.

-- 
#macro R(P)z+_(P)_(P)_(P+1)_(P+1)+z#end#macro Q(C,T)bicubic_patch{type 1u_steps
6v_steps 6R(1)R(3)R(5)R(7)pigment{rgb z}}#end#macro _(Y)#local X=asc(substr(C,Y
,1))-65;<T+mod(X,4)div(X,4)9>-2#end#macro O(T)Q("ABEFUQWS",T)Q("WSXTLOJN",T)#
end O(0)O(3)Q("JNKLCGCD",0)light_source{x 1}// ron### [at] povrayorg

Post a reply to this message

"Timothy R. Cook" <tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom> a écrit dans le message de
news: 3C023F30.A735E391@scifi-fantasy.com...
> Texture mapping?  Look at the attached image.  I
> don't care WHAT texture you slap on it, it's not
> going to look right; the geometry is flat out
> wrong.

You're certainly true on all counts about Poser, and being about a Poser
user since version 1 I certainly know about its shortcomings. Are these
flaws laughable ? Well, lots of people laugh at Povray too...
So the question isn't to know whether Poser characters are the epitome of
realism, but what practical solution Povray users have when it comes to put
realistic characters in their scenes and whether it's possible to obtain
acceptable artistic results with it.
Granted, people have done nice work with sPatch, Blender, or even blobs. As
far as I'm concerned, however, the present answer is either to use Poser and
ready-made Poser models, or to spend enormous amounts of time using costly
modellers, often at the expense of developing real scenes. Unless someone
has a better solution...

G.

--

**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

That hurts...

--
Jonathan.

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:
>Unless someone has a better solution...

Hand made clay models and a 3d scanner?... if only I could afford that...

--
Jonathan.

Post a reply to this message

Ron Parker wrote:
> That's a pretty provincial attitude.  I can't see it being a useful
> attitude for anything but the IRTC or the digital photo contest or
> something like that.

Useful?  Huh?  *blinks in confusion*
-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

JRG wrote:
> Gilles Tran wrote:
> > Unless someone has a better solution...
> Hand made clay models and a 3d scanner?...
> if only I could afford that...

Nah, the solution is to get your own full-body
scanner and motion-capture system.  ;)

My personal solution in the meanwhile: use a
model of either a mannequin or a skeleton,
whichever is handy, ignoring muscles etc.

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

Timothy R. Cook wrote:
> Nah, the solution is to get your own full-body
> scanner
Hey, I don't need that perfection... ;)

Post a reply to this message

JRG wrote:
> Hey, I don't need that perfection... ;)

The mannequin leant to me by DC works just
fine for me atm...might at some point finish
my port of the Poser mannequin just because,
but DC's mannequin looks just fine with some
texture modifications to indicate shirt/pants.

I still want a program where you can build
blobs that can contract and attach them to
other objects, to simulate muscles; this way
you can just build a skeleton (any skeleton,
of anything...) and attach muscles.  I don't
know if AnimationMaster can do this; I haven't
read the manual/used it at all yet.  hehe
Maybe I should...
-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

Timothy R. Cook wrote:
> I still want a program where you can build
> blobs that can contract and attach them to
> other objects, to simulate muscles; this way
> you can just build a skeleton (any skeleton,
> of anything...) and attach muscles.

Dunno, maybe Impulse's Organica can do that.

--
Jonathan.

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 14:50:19 -0500, Timothy R. Cook wrote:
> Ron Parker wrote:
>> That's a pretty provincial attitude.  I can't see it being a useful
>> attitude for anything but the IRTC or the digital photo contest or
>> something like that.
> 
> Useful?  Huh?  *blinks in confusion*

The idea that any one program should be good enough to make an image is
pretty provincial.  It's only a useful restriction to hold yourself to 
if your goal is to illustrate your skill with that one program, as with
the IRTC or some other contests that restrict or disallow the use of post.
Otherwise, it might get in the way of what you're trying to express.

So, for example, if I want to make an image for whatever purpose, I will
freely use whatever features of POV, netpbm, Photoshop, and Illustrator 
are best for the job, and I'll often use all four on the same image (yes,
believe it or not, there are things that netpbm does better than Photoshop.
Batch processing and compositing such as that used to make my big O'Hare 
image are among them.) 

In any case, the "one image one program" philosophy falls down in the face
of using Poser to create scenes for POV anyway.

--
#macro R(L P)sphere{L __}cylinder{L P __}#end#macro P(_1)union{R(z+_ z)R(-z _-z)
R(_-z*3_+z)torus{1__ clipped_by{plane{_ 0}}}translate z+_1}#end#macro S(_)9-(_1-
_)*(_1-_)#end#macro Z(_1 _ __)union{P(_)P(-_)R(y-z-1_)translate.1*_1-y*8pigment{
rgb<S(7)S(5)S(3)>}}#if(_1)Z(_1-__,_,__)#end#end Z(10x*-2,.2)camera{rotate x*90}

Post a reply to this message

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Timothy R. Cook <tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom>
Newsgroups: povray.binaries.images
Datum: Montag, 26. November 2001 17:47
Betreff: Re: People


>Rocket Jock wrote:
>If you can't do everything you need to do on
>the first render pass, what's the point of
>using a renderer?  If you're gonna retouch it,
>make the whole bloody thing in your paint
>program. ;)  "One program per image!"


That's a bit like saying: "One brush per image", or "one color"
...
BTW: If you take that really serious, you can't use modellers,
Poser or even another text editor for your images, if you want to
render them with Pov.

IMO you have to use what is needed to get the result you want.
Where is the point in letting a program or programmers restrict
you in what you want to express in you image? Is it your work or
there's?

Marc-Hendrik

P.S: Sorry for sending this to you by PM, too. Wrong button ...

Post a reply to this message

"Timothy R. Cook" <tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom> a écrit dans le message de
news: 3C02A225.B033D93B@scifi-fantasy.com...
> I still want a program where you can build
> blobs that can contract and attach them to
> other objects, to simulate muscles; this way
> you can just build a skeleton (any skeleton,
> of anything...) and attach muscles.

Well, there's this company :
http://www.reflex3d.com/index.html
Trouble is, I'm not very convinced by what they show...

G.

--

**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

Or you might go to the "The Visible Human Project" site
            http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/visible/visible_human.html

go to "A sampler of images and animations from the Project"
            http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/visible/visible_gallery.html

and download "From head to toe: an animated trip through the Visible Human
male cryosections [color MPEG, 770810 bytes] "
            http://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/visible/mpeg/umd_video.mpg

download the file, extract all the frames, and start measuring to collect
points to create a mesh of the complete body.
You have there all the information you need in order to build all, from
outline, to bones, to muscles, etc :))))))))))))))

Needless to say, it is quite a GIGANTIC task, but the result should be
pretty amazing.
If you ever achieve that, please let me know 'cause I would be very happy to
take a look at the final result.

For those who don't know, the visible human project wants to create  a
complete 3D representation of the human body. For that they got a body from
someone who was executed by lethal injection (I think) and was put inside
some sort of gel that solidified, and then sliced the body into 4mm
sections. They took pictures of each section, and thats what can be seen on
the mpeg. So you can see the body interior starting from head to toes. Too
bad the sampler available to download has  a small resolution. But I think
it is possible (with HUGE amounts of patience) to get a fairly good mesh
from those cross sections.

If anyone wants to try that, I think it could be done if we could gather
enough people to help. Because if each one took 20 or 30 or 40 frames, and
with a common method we could get enough information to create a mesh rather
quickly.
(I must be crazy proposing this!!! :P )

Well, thats just an idea. (a crazy one)


Best Regards

Post a reply to this message

>Rocket Jock wrote:
>If you can't do everything you need to do on
>the first render pass, what's the point of
>using a renderer?  If you're gonna retouch it,
>make the whole bloody thing in your paint
>program. ;)  "One program per image!"

... actually, I didn't write that, I believe Mr. Cook did.
But that's not the point because that's not what I meant anyway. I said it
was cheating if you retouch an image in a paint program, not you shouldn't
use things from one program in another program. I consider myself to be an
artist and I enjoy using alkyds, acrylics and oils and I often paint from
life and sometimes from photos but I wouldn't scan my paintings and then
touch them up in Photoshop and then print them... because I consider that to
be cheating. Some people enjoy doing that and some are really good at it,
but it doesn't mean we shouldn't go to the moon. I didn't become an artist
because I like fighting fires. I became an artist because I like the smell
of burning rubber. My Dad likes putting milk in his coffee and sometimes
cream. My Mum thinks that's just awful and I think they're both nuts because
coffee tastes like dirt.

We have strayed however because I think the original question was:
>>Anyone ever managed to create realistic looking people in Povray? Could
you post some examples
>>of the "state-of-the-art"?
and then someone mentioned Poser and now the baby's missing and all we have
is a bathtub with some suds in it.

Like I said before:
"I  have three images from quite a while ago (1997 is the date on the files)
that I got from Compuserve. I do not remember who posted the images but for
some reason I don't think it was the guy who actually created them. The
images are of a woman (he) called Sadie and they were very good back then
and still look very good today... I was just looking at them. He said that
he (the guy that was working on them, possibly -Bobby Dasler- if anyone
knows who he is)
was trying to make a completely posable version for possible use in a
movie."

Pez

Post a reply to this message

Rocket Jock schrieb in Nachricht <3c0311f9@news.povray.org>...
>>Rocket Jock wrote:
[...]
>... actually, I didn't write that, I believe Mr. Cook did.


Oh sorry for that! Should have looked better. I knew it was Mr. Cook.

You are right, this has nothing more to do with the original question.

Marc-Hendrik

Post a reply to this message

Rocket Jock wrote:
> But that's not the point because that's not what
> I meant anyway. I said it was cheating if you
> retouch an image in a paint program, not you
> shouldn't use things from one program in another
> program.

I agree, and was just going a bit overboard with
my overzealous exaggeration...I don't have a
problem with swapping between 3d programs to
build a scene, but I do think retouching the
final render in a paint program is cheating.

> I became an artist because I like the smell
> of burning rubber.

Eh?  Cognition failure.  Burning rubber encourages
artistry?

> We have strayed however because I think the original question was:
> >> Anyone ever managed to create realistic looking
> >> people in Povray? Could you post some examples
> >> of the "state-of-the-art"?
> and then someone mentioned Poser and now the baby's missing
> and all we have is a bathtub with some suds in it.

Actually that is one thing I'd like to do; build a realistic
looking person using just primitives in POV/Moray.  I just
need to work up the ambition.  (And Brutus is an honourable
man.)
-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 23:44:30 -0000, "JPGargoyle" <jpg### [at] clixpt>
wrote:

>Well, thats just an idea. (a crazy one)

What do you have against isosurfaces?


Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG      e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message

Peter Popov wrote:
> What do you have against isosurfaces?

I'd like to see the formula for that...

...we are still talking about generating a replica of
the human body in POV, right?
-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

"Timothy R. Cook" <tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom> wrote in message
news:3C039400.5C906B7B@scifi-fantasy.com...
> Peter Popov wrote:
> > What do you have against isosurfaces?
>
> I'd like to see the formula for that...
>
> ...we are still talking about generating a replica of
> the human body in POV, right?

I'm beginning to think isosurfaces would be the easiest way - if it was faster.
With isosurfaces it's very easy to bridge the problems you would get with blobs.

--
- Nekar

http://nekar_xenos.tripod.com/metanoia/



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.298 / Virus Database: 161 - Release Date: 2001/11/13

Post a reply to this message

> >Well, thats just an idea. (a crazy one)
>
> What do you have against isosurfaces?

Me? Nothing. Why?

Best Regards

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:24:16 -0500, "Timothy R. Cook"
<tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom> wrote:

>Peter Popov wrote:
>> What do you have against isosurfaces?
>
>I'd like to see the formula for that...

idat3d should do. At least it did for that human head 3D data on the
POV-Ray CDROM.

I am not saying it will be easy, but at least it will be sane :)


Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG      e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 27 Nov 2001 22:12:28 -0000, "JPGargoyle" <jpg### [at] clixpt>
wrote:

>> What do you have against isosurfaces?
>
>Me? Nothing. Why?

Because IMHO an iso would be the easiest way to do what you want to
do.


Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG      e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message

"Peter Popov" <pet### [at] vipbg> wrote in message
news:5rk90ugsq4q3mas9a780eqtq0k36a5edcj@4ax.com...

> Because IMHO an iso would be the easiest way to do what you want to
> do.

Easiest in what way?
To me is easier to collect the point coordinates and build a mesh (I think
:/)
And wouldn't it need muuuuch more processing power to render it using
isosurfaces?

Best regards.

Post a reply to this message

JPGargoyle wrote:
> Easiest in what way?
> To me is easier to collect the point coordinates and build a mesh (I think
> :/)
> And wouldn't it need muuuuch more processing power to render it using
> isosurfaces?

Nah, simple equipotential surfaces render quite fast...

(ok, building a human being from idat3d wouldn't be that simple but... why
bother, Hamapatch is my choice :)

--
Jonathan.

Post a reply to this message

"Timothy R. Cook" wrote:
> I still want a program where you can build
> blobs that can contract and attach them to
> other objects, to simulate muscles; . . .

how about this?:  http://www.beautifulcode.nl/struck/


-- 
Anton Sherwood  --  http://www.ogre.nu/

Post a reply to this message