 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi folks,
2 new versions of my submarine landscape. Still fighting with media.
It seems that the method I use isn't very efficient since the media effect
is really linked to the global lighting.
Which one do you prefer?
Next steps: fin and ground texture.
Chaps.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'Fond1.jpg' (113 KB)
Download 'Fond2.jpg' (119 KB)
Preview of image 'Fond1.jpg'
Preview of image 'Fond2.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"chaps" <cha### [at] yahoo com> wrote in message
news:3dcb7dbb@news.povray.org...
>
> It seems that the method I use isn't very efficient since the media effect
> is really linked to the global lighting.
> Which one do you prefer?
#1 for more realism, #3 for more surrealism. But I actually like 2 best
because it has more eye-candyism and therefore is more fascinating to see
(only by comparison, that is).
Not sure what the struggle with media is about there, I recall you had
trouble getting the jellyfish to be hollow correctly. Or maybe it was
actually some other thing, like fitting their objects into the water object.
Anyway... sounds like you are saying it's a scattering media, but it looks
to me like emitting kind instead which wouldn't be affected by lights.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"hughes, b." <omn### [at] charternet> wrote in message
news:3dcd1596@news.povray.org...
> > Which one do you prefer?
>
> #1 for more realism, #3 for more surrealism. But I actually like 2 best
Ha! Sorry, luckily I reread most my posts soon as I can to check them. That
number 3 shouldn't be there, of course. Yeah, I do scan over what I post
right before posting too but I never catch every mistake.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
