Gilles Tran wrote:
> 
> Just one of these little exercises,without much ambition but always
> interesting to do because of what it makes you learn in the process.
> The original is there :
> http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/f18/f18_17.jpg
> 

Plane and water look good, the sun seems fairly unrealistic to me, but
since i can't access the original it i'm not able to compare it.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,                 
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/  
Last updated 03 Aug. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

Yeah... and one's got it's wheels down. :-)

All the best,

Andy Cocker

"Francois Labreque" <fla### [at] videotronca> wrote in message
news:3D5### [at] videotronca...
>
>
> Gilles Tran wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> I that the camera angle is different.  The real image was probably taken
> with a telephoto lens from much further away.  The perspective lines
> extending from the sidewinder missiles seem to confirm this.
>
> I faced similar problems when trying to reproduce the Tiananmen picture
> for the contrast IRTC round.  I couldn't get the tanks to look right,
> but I found another picture that showed a lot more from the plaza and I
> realised that the Associated Press journalist who took the one I tried
> to reproduce was standing on a balcony two blocks away.
>
> I also think that your Sun is bigger that the real one.
>
> This might explain the difference in the size/shape of the reflection on
> the water.
>
> Now, excuse me as I'll go flagellate myself for criticizing The Master's
> work.
> --
> /*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
> /*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
> /*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
> /*   videotron.ca  */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
>


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






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

Post a reply to this message

news: 3D5### [at] videotronca...
> I that the camera angle is different.  The real image was probably taken
> with a telephoto lens from much further away.  The perspective lines
> extending from the sidewinder missiles seem to confirm this.

In fact I was under the impression it was more the other way round. The
plane looks "longer" in the photo so I thought that it was taken with a
shorter focal, which would also explains why the sun reflection is smaller.
The Terragen pic is made with a quite long focal, otherwise I couldn't get
the sun disc. Possibly I was wrong there and the big white spot in the photo
is not the disc but the corona flare, in which case I can't seem to
reproduce the effect in Terragen (which seems right for most of the rest,
like the waves aspect and colours). Of course my image is made from two
uncorrelated camera setups (the Terragen one and the Povray one) as I didn't
try to match them mathematically. Perhaps I should try this instead, and get
everything in "real" units. As I said, this sort of exercise is very
educational.

G.

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

Post a reply to this message

6v04luoh57ih2biug1jhb1f8tkc6pkb6am@4ax.com...

Does this one work ? The deep linking worked with IE but perhaps it's a
browser thing.
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/f18/pics02.shtml
It's a good resource for aircrafts images, particularly from a
texturing/lighting point of view, as it shows the same "objects" under
different lighting conditions.

G.

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

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 8 Aug 2002 11:59:14 +0200, "Gilles Tran" <git### [at] wanadoofr> wrote:
> Does this one work ?

Yes.

> It's a good resource for aircrafts images, particularly from a
> texturing/lighting point of view, as it shows the same "objects" under
> different lighting conditions.

Yes.

Thanks and congratulations for the effect.

ABX

Post a reply to this message

cfg4lusb3qq3h67koo635pjc1408h7rttq@4ax.com...
> Thanks and congratulations for the effect.

Thanks. Note that I'm certain that the sun could be better if done with a
clever Povray pigment. What I'm clueless about doing it in Povray is the
water. I don't feel like tweaking giant
RMF-isosurfaces-with-radiosity-with-media-with-reflection-with-transparency
for days. I've been there and got nice results, but never close to the real
thing.  Apart the reflection (which is the best I could do, but not the best
someone with more Terragen experience could do probably) the Terragen water
is really realistic.

G.


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

Post a reply to this message

Looks like there might be a blur behind the exhaust on the original.  I
would expect to see some
heat from the engines creating heat disturbance of some kind.  Still you are
amazing as always.

"Gilles Tran" <git### [at] wanadoofr> wrote in message
news:3d51a42c@news.povray.org...
> Just one of these little exercises,without much ambition but always
> interesting to do because of what it makes you learn in the process.
> The original is there :
> http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/f18/f18_17.jpg
>
> The model was downloaded from (???) and slightly enhanced with Rhino.
> The background is made with Terragen with little or no post process (I
just
> blurred the horizon line). There was a lot of tweaking involved but
there's
> a lot of default parameters too. The whole Terragen panorama (front image
> but also the side and background) was put in Povray and then radiosity, a
> regular "sun"  and a little bit of back lighting was used. The final
result
> was slightly post-processed (tone tweaking and several cycles of gaussian
> blur/sharpening) to try to get a photo feel.
> The interesting part of course is what is missing from the original photo,
> like the too sharp sun corona and the wrong reflection of the sun.
>
> G.
>
>
> --
> **********************
> http://www.oyonale.com
> **********************
> - Graphic experiments
> - POV-Ray and Poser computer images
> - Posters
>
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Xplo Eristotle wrote:

> And the blurry cone-shaped area behind the jet, from the exhaust.
> 
> Looks like it could use a little desaturation and some noise (a very 
> small amount, and particularly in the darker areas) to dirty up the 
> picture, both of which would easily be added in post-processing, but 
> there's definitely something AWSUM about this pic.


Ditto.  :)


-- 
___     ______________________________________________
  | \     |_         website: http://davidf.faricy.net/
  |_/avid |ontaine           email: <dav### [at] faricynet>

Post a reply to this message

Amazing.

Other than the sun disk, I actually think this looks 'more real than real'.

I think this is because I have blue eyes, so 'sunset' always makes things
seem slightly 'sharper' to me - as I can finally see objects without
squinting.  SO ... your plane is sharper than the original so it puts me in
the mood of sunset better.

I agree with everyone else on the jet exhaust, although the original exhaust
is pretty subtle.

I'm working on a tank track plug in for Moray so I've quit working on the
heat shimmer thing, but it looks like several of us are or could be fiddling
with heat shimmer.

                  == John ==


"Gilles Tran" <git### [at] wanadoofr> wrote in message
news:3d51a42c@news.povray.org...
> Just one of these little exercises,without much ambition but always
> interesting to do because of what it makes you learn in the process.
> The original is there :
> http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/f18/f18_17.jpg
>
> The model was downloaded from (???) and slightly enhanced with Rhino.
> The background is made with Terragen with little or no post process (I
just
> blurred the horizon line). There was a lot of tweaking involved but
there's
> a lot of default parameters too. The whole Terragen panorama (front image
> but also the side and background) was put in Povray and then radiosity, a
> regular "sun"  and a little bit of back lighting was used. The final
result
> was slightly post-processed (tone tweaking and several cycles of gaussian
> blur/sharpening) to try to get a photo feel.
> The interesting part of course is what is missing from the original photo,
> like the too sharp sun corona and the wrong reflection of the sun.
>
> G.
>
>
> --
> **********************
> http://www.oyonale.com
> **********************
> - Graphic experiments
> - POV-Ray and Poser computer images
> - Posters
>
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

How did you do the engine-flames?

"Gilles Tran" <git### [at] wanadoofr> schreef in bericht
news:3d51a42c@news.povray.org...
> Just one of these little exercises,without much ambition but always
> interesting to do because of what it makes you learn in the process.
> The original is there :
> http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/f18/f18_17.jpg
>
> The model was downloaded from (???) and slightly enhanced with Rhino.
> The background is made with Terragen with little or no post process (I
just
> blurred the horizon line). There was a lot of tweaking involved but
there's
> a lot of default parameters too. The whole Terragen panorama (front image
> but also the side and background) was put in Povray and then radiosity, a
> regular "sun"  and a little bit of back lighting was used. The final
result
> was slightly post-processed (tone tweaking and several cycles of gaussian
> blur/sharpening) to try to get a photo feel.
> The interesting part of course is what is missing from the original photo,
> like the too sharp sun corona and the wrong reflection of the sun.
>
> G.
>
>
> --
> **********************
> http://www.oyonale.com
> **********************
> - Graphic experiments
> - POV-Ray and Poser computer images
> - Posters
>
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message