Great metal texture...
--
Regards,
C.J. POV User
PRSG
http://hyperion.spaceports.com/~povstudy/
hou### [at] yahoocom

BTW - how did you do the metal texture?
-------



Dave Blandston <gra### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in message
news:3c1f5d2f$1@news.povray.org...
> That's a great metal texture! The modeling looks first rate, as well.
>
> --
> -David
> "Simon Adameit" <gom### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
> news:3c1f5a50@news.povray.org...
> >
> > Hi, It doesn't look pre or after TOS like but how do you like it?
>
>

Post a reply to this message

CJ <hou### [at] yahoocom> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
3c1f8085$1@news.povray.org...
> Great metal texture...
> --

Thanks.

>
> BTW - how did you do the metal texture?
> -------
My English is not very good, so I better send you the source then describing
how I did it.

#local R=seed(123);
#local Z=0;
#declare rumpf_tex=
texture{average
  texture_map{
#while(Z<5)
#local T=<rand(R),rand(R),rand(R)>-0.5;
#local S=rand(R)+0.5;
[
finish{ambient 0 diffuse 0.3 phong 1.2 phong_size 2 specular 1 roughness
0.01 metallic }

pigment{cells
  color_map{
    [0 rgb 1]
    [1 rgb 0.1]}
  translate T
  scale 1.5
  scale S}

normal{cells bump_size 1 translate T scale 1.5 scale S}
]
#local Z=Z+1;
#end}}

Post a reply to this message

Simon Adameit wrote:
> Hi, It doesn't look pre or after TOS like but how do you like it?

Turn it on its side and you've got a BBQ grill ;)
-- 
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

"Simon Adameit" <gom### [at] gmxde> wrote in news:3c1f6cd8@news.povray.org:

> About that background thing, how do you all render Chris Colefax
> galaxys with antialiasing without destroing the stars?

Use galaxy.sf rather than galaxy.bg to generate the starfield.  Starfields 
generated with galaxy.sf will survive antialiasing while other starfield 
types won't.

Another galaxy-related pitfall is that you'll need to add triangle_wave to 
the pattern declaration for BGMilkyWay in galaxy.bg if you want to use the 
milky way background in Pov 3.5.

Post a reply to this message

Personally, I think it's a fine pre-TOS look.  I like the metal texture as
well.  The new cells pattern is going to come in handy.

"Simon Adameit" <gom### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3c1f5a50@news.povray.org...
>
> Hi, It doesn't look pre or after TOS like but how do you like it?
>
>
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Very good model.

But I think it would look a little more like a space ship if it was more
"aerodynamic" on the front side.
More conic shaped, at least in those spikes that are projected to the front.
I know this will be difficult to do specially if (as I guess) this is all
CSG done right?

But certainly is a very good model.
Good work :)


Best regards.

"Simon Adameit" <gom### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3c1f5a50@news.povray.org...
>
> Hi, It doesn't look pre or after TOS like but how do you like it?
>

Post a reply to this message

JPGargoyle <jpg### [at] clixpt> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
3c2242be@news.povray.org...
> Very good model.
>
> But I think it would look a little more like a space ship if it was more
> "aerodynamic" on the front side.
> More conic shaped, at least in those spikes that are projected to the
front.
> I know this will be difficult to do specially if (as I guess) this is all
> CSG done right?
>
> But certainly is a very good model.
> Good work :)

Thanks.
How do you know that the front is not going to be aerodynamic? I haven't
modeled it yet :-)

Post a reply to this message

Simon Adameit wrote:
> JPGargoyle <jpg### [at] clixpt> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
> > But I think it would look a little more like a space ship
> > if it was more "aerodynamic" on the front side.

> Thanks.  How do you know that the front is not going to
> be aerodynamic? I haven't modeled it yet :-)

Why does a SPACE ship need to be aerodynamic?  ;)
-- 
Tim Cook
http://personal.lig.bellsouth.net/lig/z/9/z993126

-----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 <z99### [at] bellsouthnet> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
3C239724.A7474641@bellsouth.net...
> Simon Adameit wrote:
> > JPGargoyle <jpg### [at] clixpt> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
> > > But I think it would look a little more like a space ship
> > > if it was more "aerodynamic" on the front side.
>
> > Thanks.  How do you know that the front is not going to
> > be aerodynamic? I haven't modeled it yet :-)
>
> Why does a SPACE ship need to be aerodynamic?  ;)
Render time. I'm planning to make an animation where it's flying through
some media ;-)

Post a reply to this message

It looks like a warp capable drone of some kind - no rows of little white window
rectangles.

Simon Adameit wrote:

> Hi, It doesn't look pre or after TOS like but how do you like it?
>
>  [Image]

Post a reply to this message