A few changes, mainly in illumination and the finish of the dice.

I tried to emphasize that the dots are carvings and not only paint. I don't
know if it is noticeable.

I applied a slight noise, again, to add a bit of realism.

Overall, I think it did improve from last version.

I'm very interested in you opinions/comments.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'dice14_pp.JPG' (101 KB)

Preview of image 'dice14_pp.JPG'

Fernando Gonzalez del Cueto wrote:
> 
> I'm very interested in you opinions/comments.

I'd make the corners just slightly sharper, but otherwise, it looks very good.

-Xplo

Post a reply to this message

"Fernando Gonzalez del Cueto" <fcu### [at] yahoocom> wrote :
>
> I applied a slight noise, again, to add a bit of realism.

    You know, I've been looking around, and I don't see any noise. Perhaps
you meant photo-realism, which is much less real than realism. Or perhaps it
is time you had your eyes checked?

Post a reply to this message

It's great.
It's a shame the render isn't higher quality. Perhaps you should make
another render over a very long period of time...

"Fernando Gonzalez del Cueto" <fcu### [at] yahoocom> wrote in message
news:3d039e5a@news.povray.org...
> A few changes, mainly in illumination and the finish of the dice.
>
> I tried to emphasize that the dots are carvings and not only paint. I
don't
> know if it is noticeable.
>
> I applied a slight noise, again, to add a bit of realism.
>
> Overall, I think it did improve from last version.
>
> I'm very interested in you opinions/comments.
>

>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Here's the same image without the noise. If you compared them closely, you
can see that this one is cleaner.
I used the technique described by Kari Kavisalo some posts ago. Scale up the
image, add noise (double noise in the blue channel), blur a bit, scale down
again.

It's subtle, but should be noticeable to the trained eye.

And yes, among other shortcomings, I have far-from-perfect eyesight. Perhaps
somebody who was born luckier than me, and has better eyes could tell me
that both images are not the same.

Of course, I strive for realism and photo-realism, please forgive my poor
English which didn't let me express myself as I wanted.

Fernando.



"Bill DeWitt" <bde### [at] cflrrcom> wrote in message
news:3d03aa22$1@news.povray.org...
>
> "Fernando Gonzalez del Cueto" <fcu### [at] yahoocom> wrote :
> >
> > I applied a slight noise, again, to add a bit of realism.
>
>     You know, I've been looking around, and I don't see any noise. Perhaps
> you meant photo-realism, which is much less real than realism. Or perhaps
it
> is time you had your eyes checked?

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'dice14ppns.JPG' (80 KB)

Preview of image 'dice14ppns.JPG'

"Xplo Eristotle" <xpl### [at] infomagicnet> wrote in message
news:3D0### [at] infomagicnet...
> Fernando Gonzalez del Cueto wrote:
> >
> > I'm very interested in you opinions/comments.
>
> I'd make the corners just slightly sharper, but otherwise, it looks very
good.

Thanks Xplo, I'm glad you liked it! If I have time, I'll experiment with
sharper dice.

Thanks for your suggestion!

Fernando.

Post a reply to this message

"ncryptor" <o### [at] ocom> wrote in message news:3d03b2bf@news.povray.org...
> It's great.
> It's a shame the render isn't higher quality. Perhaps you should make
> another render over a very long period of time...

Thanks ncryptor! Yes, I agree... This one took about 1h30m in my PII@833.
Probably I'll render a larger version with better focal blur overnight.

Thanks again!

Fernando.

Post a reply to this message

"Fernando Gonzalez del Cueto" <fcu### [at] yahoocom> wrote in message
news:3d03b478@news.povray.org...
> Thanks ncryptor! Yes, I agree... This one took about 1h30m in my PII@833.
> Probably I'll render a larger version with better focal blur overnight.

I think it would be better if you used a slightly wider depth of field also.

All the best,

Andy Cocker

Post a reply to this message

I like it, though the focal blur definitely needs some higher settings, and
I'm really not crazy about this add-noise-for-photorealism trick that
everyone's doing. =)

 - Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]

Post a reply to this message

Hi Slime,

I'm glad you liked it! Perhaps I'll leave it overnight rendering with more
ambitious settings; I agree that the focal blur needs more samples.

About the noise, I'm also not fully convinced about it's usefulness... But
thanks for your comment.

Fernando.

"Slime" <slm### [at] slimelandcom> wrote in message
news:3d03d61a$1@news.povray.org...
> I like it, though the focal blur definitely needs some higher settings,
and
> I'm really not crazy about this add-noise-for-photorealism trick that
> everyone's doing. =)
>
>  - Slime

Post a reply to this message