 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Closing in on 4 months since I last posted anything. Anyone ever notice that
they come back from a long "povray break" to find themselves better, or at
least with fresh ideas and a renewed interest? Anyway I recently dug up a
project I started a long time ago, modelling my garage, and have been
working on it these past couple of days. Object wise this is by far the
densest image I've done, also the reason I quit the project a while back.
There are still a few things I'd like to add but its getting very close to
being finished, besides there are other things I'd like to play with :-)
There are 1700 some odd objects here, all modeled in Moray or Rhino, by
objects I mean primitives. Took 5Hrs 44Mins to render on Pov 3.5 Beta 9. I
played around with various radiosity settings, I could not decide between
recursion 3 and recursion 1, I settled on 1 because 3 looked a little too
washed out but it had more of a nice warm feeling.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'house - garage 3.JPG' (125 KB)
Preview of image 'house - garage 3.JPG'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
it looks really good..
maybe your garage is just cleaner than mine.. but it seems way too clean.. i
dunno..
no dust... no dirt..
everything is just too smooth
-darrell
"Thomas Lake" <tla### [at] home com> wrote in message
news:3c3f94a1@news.povray.org...
> Closing in on 4 months since I last posted anything. Anyone ever notice
that
> they come back from a long "povray break" to find themselves better, or at
> least with fresh ideas and a renewed interest? Anyway I recently dug up a
> project I started a long time ago, modelling my garage, and have been
> working on it these past couple of days. Object wise this is by far the
> densest image I've done, also the reason I quit the project a while back.
> There are still a few things I'd like to add but its getting very close to
> being finished, besides there are other things I'd like to play with :-)
> There are 1700 some odd objects here, all modeled in Moray or Rhino, by
> objects I mean primitives. Took 5Hrs 44Mins to render on Pov 3.5 Beta 9. I
> played around with various radiosity settings, I could not decide between
> recursion 3 and recursion 1, I settled on 1 because 3 looked a little too
> washed out but it had more of a nice warm feeling.
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darrell Miller" <dar### [at] tallskinnyboycom> wrote in message
news:3c3f9cb3@news.povray.org...
> it looks really good..
> maybe your garage is just cleaner than mine.. but it seems way too clean..
i
> dunno..
> no dust... no dirt..
> everything is just too smooth
Hehe a bit ironic you should mention that my garage may be cleaner than
yours, actually my real garage has about 10 times as much stuff as I have in
this picture, but I don't have that kind of time or memory:-) However I am
going to add some more stuff. "Dust" is often something people site is
missing in raytraced images but something that is extremely hard to
simulate. I've sometimes found that using a small normal of any type on
objects can make them seem a bit rougher, sort of like they are covered in
dust, but not really.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Wow... =]
Thomas Lake wrote:
> Closing in on 4 months since I last posted anything. Anyone ever notice that
> they come back from a long "povray break" to find themselves better, or at
> least with fresh ideas and a renewed interest? Anyway I recently dug up a
> project I started a long time ago, modelling my garage, and have been
> working on it these past couple of days. Object wise this is by far the
> densest image I've done, also the reason I quit the project a while back.
> There are still a few things I'd like to add but its getting very close to
> being finished, besides there are other things I'd like to play with :-)
> There are 1700 some odd objects here, all modeled in Moray or Rhino, by
> objects I mean primitives. Took 5Hrs 44Mins to render on Pov 3.5 Beta 9. I
> played around with various radiosity settings, I could not decide between
> recursion 3 and recursion 1, I settled on 1 because 3 looked a little too
> washed out but it had more of a nice warm feeling.
>
> [Image]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Oooh, looks like a great candidate for radiosity.
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
[ http://www.slimeland.com/images/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Ryan Mooney" <rdm### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in message
news:3C3FC7E7.D90C4351@earthlink.net...
> Wow... =]
Thanks:-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Slime" <noo### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:3c3fcfd8@news.povray.org...
> Oooh, looks like a great candidate for radiosity.
>
> - Slime
> [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
> [ http://www.slimeland.com/images/ ]
Oops looks like I clicked "reply" when I should have clicked "reply group"
again, MS really could have done a better job with that. I used radiosity.
That's why I was saying that I was trying to decide
between recursion limit 1 and 3. Perhaps I'll try rendering it at 2 and 3
again and see.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 11 Jan 2002 22:05:05 -0800, "Thomas Lake" <tla### [at] homecom>
wrote:
>Oops looks like I clicked "reply" when I should have clicked "reply group"
>again, MS really could have done a better job with that. I used radiosity.
>That's why I was saying that I was trying to decide
>between recursion limit 1 and 3. Perhaps I'll try rendering it at 2 and 3
>again and see.
I usually use 4 but for such a tightly populated scene even 6 might
give a difference.
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas Lake wrote:
> Closing in on 4 months since I last posted anything. Anyone ever notice
> that they come back from a long "povray break" to find themselves better,
> or at least with fresh ideas and a renewed interest?
This happens to me after some minutes without tracing!
> densest image I've done, also the reason I quit the project a while back.
Worth the break! As you said, the problem with such scenes is populating
them (like my office one).
> played around with various radiosity settings, I could not decide between
> recursion 3 and recursion 1, I settled on 1 because 3 looked a little too
> washed out but it had more of a nice warm feeling.
Then use recursion 2!!! ;)
--
Jaime Vives Piqueres
La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
That's some work you've done there with all those objects.
Is the floor really that flat?
--
Cheers
Steve email mailto:ste### [at] zeroppsuklinuxnet
%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps.
web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/
or http://start.at/zero-pps
11:59am up 96 days, 3:48, 1 user, load average: 1.00, 1.02, 1.00
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think my whole damned apartment would fit inside your garage.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas Lake wrote:
>
> Closing in on 4 months since I last posted anything. Anyone ever notice that
> they come back from a long "povray break" to find themselves better, or at
> least with fresh ideas and a renewed interest? Anyway I recently dug up a
> project I started a long time ago, modelling my garage, and have been
> working on it these past couple of days. Object wise this is by far the
> densest image I've done, also the reason I quit the project a while back.
> There are still a few things I'd like to add but its getting very close to
> being finished, besides there are other things I'd like to play with :-)
> There are 1700 some odd objects here, all modeled in Moray or Rhino, by
> objects I mean primitives. Took 5Hrs 44Mins to render on Pov 3.5 Beta 9. I
> played around with various radiosity settings, I could not decide between
> recursion 3 and recursion 1, I settled on 1 because 3 looked a little too
> washed out but it had more of a nice warm feeling.
>
Looks good, are you sure all finishes have ambient 0? With recursion_limit
1 most shadows should be much darker IMO.
As others mentioned it looks a bit too clean and smooth, apart from some
more structure on walls and floor some reflection on the plastic and metal
objects would help too.
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Looks good
Thanks.
>are you sure all finishes have ambient 0?
Yes. I'm going to play around with higher recursion limits anyway.
> As others mentioned it looks a bit too clean and smooth, apart from some
> more structure on walls and floor some reflection on the plastic and metal
> objects would help too.
I'm still not quit finished with it, there are still some more things to
add. However I don't think I'm going to make any of the surfaces any more
reflective as none of the objects in my real garage are very reflective and
I don't think it would help the image any. I do agree that it looks a bit
too smooth though, but more reflections would only make that worse not
better.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> That's some work you've done there with all those objects.
Thanks:-)
> Is the floor really that flat?
Hmm you know now that you mention it, it is too smooth. I'll have to play
around with a heightfield or something, thanks for pointing it out.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>"Dust" is often something people site is
> missing in raytraced images but something that is extremely hard to
> simulate. I've sometimes found that using a small normal of any type on
> objects can make them seem a bit rougher, sort of like they are covered in
> dust, but not really.
Here is a cite that might help:
http://www.dvgarage.com
It seems like this guy made his career "dirtying things up".Two tutes in
particular might be useful: the crate and the parking lot.
Short of resorting to image maps like he does you might try the new slope
pattern mapped into the pigment_pattern.
There is some nice modelling here. I see I'm not the only one with a blown
monitor or two that I don't know what to do with :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > Closing in on 4 months since I last posted anything. Anyone ever notice
> > that they come back from a long "povray break" to find themselves
better,
> > or at least with fresh ideas and a renewed interest?
>
> This happens to me after some minutes without tracing!
Hehe
> > densest image I've done, also the reason I quit the project a while
back.
>
> Worth the break!
Thanks!
> As you said, the problem with such scenes is populating
> them (like my office one).
Yeah but I'm almost done 'populating' mine, at least I hope I'm almost done.
> > played around with various radiosity settings, I could not decide
between
> > recursion 3 and recursion 1, I settled on 1 because 3 looked a little
too
> > washed out but it had more of a nice warm feeling.
>
> Then use recursion 2!!! ;)
I did try it but there was very little difference between 2 and 1, there
seemed to be a much larger jump from 2 to 3. I'm now actually playing around
with the idea of using much higher recursion limits, like 4-6.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> There is some nice modelling here. I see I'm not the only one with a blown
> monitor or two that I don't know what to do with :)
I had the same thought. Got a collection of 'em in my basement. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> > Looks good
>
> Thanks.
>
> >are you sure all finishes have ambient 0?
>
> Yes. I'm going to play around with higher recursion limits anyway.
Oops I stand corrected you are right I had a number of textures with ambient
0.1 and ones that covered a significant area of the image too, thanks for
pointing that out:-)
<snip>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
that's allot o' work even with a modeler... =]
no prob... =-]
Thomas Lake wrote:
> "Ryan Mooney" <rdm### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in message
> news:3C3FC7E7.D90C4351@earthlink.net...
> > Wow... =]
>
> Thanks:-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
