 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi all,
Someone sent this file awhile back, forgot who.
Who ever sent it, can you send me the source code?
Thanks
Brian
--
Southern Cross Akitas (SCA)
Lois & Brian Bivolcic
Pampa, Tx
http://www.centramedia.com/bivolcic/default.htm
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'simple.jpg' (59 KB)
Preview of image 'simple.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
'Twas KalleK, in the post 'simple and beautiful (59Kbbu)'.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Hi all,
> Someone sent this file awhile back, forgot who.
> Who ever sent it, can you send me the source code?
That was me.
I'm sorry, but I don't have the actual code that moment (it is stored
in the computer at my girlfriend).
But I can try to find something similar... <wait a moment> seems to be
the same. see below...
It was made just as a background for some testscenes. You should
render with povray3.1g - it looks quite different with 3.5beta (due to
the changed noise_generator, I think)
/// start
plane {y,0
pigment {
spiral1 3
turbulence .2
color_map {
[0.0 color rgb 0]
[0.3 color rgb <.6,.2,.8>]
[1.0 color rgb 1]
}
scale 30
}
}
camera {
location <0,8,-15>
look_at <0,6,0>
}
light_source {
<-100,300,-200>
color rgb 1
}
/// end
... simple, isn't it...
cukk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
KalleK
>You should render with povray3.1g - it looks
>quite different with 3.5beta (due to
> the changed noise_generator, I think)
You can always use noise_generator 1. The result should be pretty the same.
--
Jonathan.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> You can always use noise_generator 1. The result should be pretty
the same.
I know, but in this case it wasn't somehow.
At least it wasn't looking that way.
Well, I can't proof it, but in my mind the source was pretty the same
as I posted a moment ago (except the look_at) - and it's looking to
swirly compared to the picture posted some days ago. (not tested with
povray3.1 though.
thanks, anyway.
cukk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
You're right. Here are some images for comparison:
1) Rendered with POV-Ray 3.1g
2) Rendered with POV-Ray v3.5 b7 noise_generator 1
3) Rendered with POV-Ray v3.5 b7 noise_generator 2
4) Rendered with POV-Ray v3.5 b7 noise_generator 3
5) Rendered with POV-Ray v3.5 b7 noise_generator 1 +a0.1 +am2 (really weird)
The three noise_generators in POV-Ray 3.5 look pretty similar. Noone looks
close to the 3.1 version. Now I understand why I had so much trouble while
converting one of my wood textures from POV 3.1 to POV 3.5...
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'spiral31.jpg' (11 KB)
Download 'spiral35noise1.jpg' (13 KB)
Download 'spiral35noise2.jpg' (13 KB)
Download 'spiral35noise3.jpg' (13 KB)
Download 'spiral35noise1aa.jpg' (13 KB)
Preview of image 'spiral31.jpg'
Preview of image 'spiral35noise1.jpg'
Preview of image 'spiral35noise2.jpg'
Preview of image 'spiral35noise3.jpg'
Preview of image 'spiral35noise1aa.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I did some other tests, and I have to say that with spiral1 noise_generator
1 and noise_generator 2 are absolutely identical.
--
Jonathan.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> You're right. Here are some images for comparison:
>
> 1) Rendered with POV-Ray 3.1g
> 2) Rendered with POV-Ray v3.5 b7 noise_generator 1
> 3) Rendered with POV-Ray v3.5 b7 noise_generator 2
> 4) Rendered with POV-Ray v3.5 b7 noise_generator 3
> 5) Rendered with POV-Ray v3.5 b7 noise_generator 1 +a0.1 +am2
(really weird)
huh? what's that moire in 5) ?
> The three noise_generators in POV-Ray 3.5 look pretty similar. Noone
looks
> close to the 3.1 version. Now I understand why I had so much trouble
while
> converting one of my wood textures from POV 3.1 to POV 3.5...
maybe one should note in povray.b-t or maybe it's due to the broken
agate (must be a wild guess - what does spiral1 or turbulence has to
do with that?).
But I'm falling asleep now - it's already tomorrow.
cukk
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ok, reading the docs I can say that they shouldn't be so different. But the
problem remains: why 3.1 and 3.5 (noise 1) versions are so different? And
why using aa method 2 produces those weird artefacts (even at high
resolutions)?
"JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmail com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:3c0178c0$1@news.povray.org...
> I did some other tests, and I have to say that with spiral1
noise_generator
> 1 and noise_generator 2 are absolutely identical.
>
> --
> Jonathan.
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
