 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here is a pre-beta-alpha-pre-pre-version of my first real scene with
POV-Ray 3.5 and radiosity.
Yes, it's just the begining of a scene, but have you see this strange
line dividing the image ?
Any comments are welcome :)
Denis.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'maison3-2-total-1024.jpg' (149 KB)
Preview of image 'maison3-2-total-1024.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Denis Bodor wrote:
> Any comments are welcome :)
There's a problem I've noticed with raytraced scenes with reflective
surfaces: no camera is visible in the reflection, even in the 'photo-
realistic' scenes. I think this one detail subliminally detracts
from ever being able to truly think 'this is a photo'...;)
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Timothy R. Cook" <tim### [at] scifi-fantasy com> wrote in message
news:3dd11e3a@news.povray.org...
> There's a problem I've noticed with raytraced scenes with reflective
> surfaces: no camera is visible in the reflection, even in the 'photo-
> realistic' scenes. I think this one detail subliminally detracts
> from ever being able to truly think 'this is a photo'...;)
How is that relevant to a scene which has no surfaces at such an angle where the
camera would
be visible in it's current position?
And I don't understand the relevance of the 'this is a photo' comment, when Denis
makes it
quite clear that this image is about as far removed as one can get from 'the finished
article'.
Were you by chance replying to some other thread? If so, please ignore the above :-)
All the best,
Andy Cocker
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The line reminds of a continues raytrace at that point. If the radiosity
values aren't loaded and saved to files, the continued raytrace will often
create a slightly different appearance.
"Denis Bodor" <lef### [at] lefinnoisnet> wrote in message
news:3dd117a7@news.povray.org...
> Here is a pre-beta-alpha-pre-pre-version of my first real scene with
> POV-Ray 3.5 and radiosity.
>
> Yes, it's just the begining of a scene, but have you see this strange
> line dividing the image ?
>
> Any comments are welcome :)
>
> Denis.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I see that strange dividing line you are referring to. What is that? It is
almost as if a boundary box or media container is being shown. A puzzle.
I also notice that where the pairs of columns meet at the corners, there is
an odd plane clipped in at a 45 degree angle. Is that a clue?
Cheers!
Chip Shults
My robotics, space and CGI web page - http://home.cfl.rr.com/aichip
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sir Charles W. Shults III wrote:
> I see that strange dividing line you are referring to. What is
> that?
That's my question ;)
It's not an aborded/continued trace.
Can too poor radiosity parameters do that ?
> It is almost as if a boundary box or media container is being shown.
> A puzzle. I also notice that where the pairs of columns meet at the
> corners, there is an odd plane clipped in at a 45 degree angle. Is
> that a clue?
Of course, there is this probleme too...
It's very strange and the "line" problem is here even in small rendering.
Another probleme is the square probleme like in the joined image.
Denis.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'maison3-verre-global-area-photon.jpg' (96 KB)
Download 'maison3-2-total-320aa.jpg' (19 KB)
Preview of image 'maison3-verre-global-area-photon.jpg'
Preview of image 'maison3-2-total-320aa.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Andrew Cocker wrote:
> How is that relevant to a scene which has no surfaces at such an angle where the
camera would
> be visible in it's current position?
Actually the camera would be visible in the columns, were it extant.
> Were you by chance replying to some other thread? If so, please ignore the above :-)
No, just randomly commenting, since I saw reflective surface.
--
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Okay, from this angle I can see the source of the "column" problem- it is
that the angle itself obscured the real nature of your wall intersection there.
It is much clearer in this render. So that is a non-issue really, except that
you may want to add some sort of molding or runner to enhance the geometry of
that column/wall/floor joint. Just a thought.
As for the line artifacts, they really do appear to be radiosity related,
although since I have little experience with the subject, I don't expect that I
can be much help.
From time to time radiosity artifacts crop up that seem to be related to how
it is calculated- there may be some internal boundary that the software uses for
the algorithm, but I don't have a clue myself, not having examined the code.
Cheers!
Chip Shults
My robotics, space and CGI web page - http://home.cfl.rr.com/aichip
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sir Charles W. Shults III wrote:
> It is much clearer in this render. So that is a non-issue really,
> except that you may want to add some sort of molding or runner to
> enhance the geometry of that column/wall/floor joint. Just a thought.
Oh ! I see.
That's right. More work needed :)
>
> As for the line artifacts, they really do appear to be radiosity
> related, although since I have little experience with the subject, I
> don't expect that I can be much help.
Hmmmm, I gonna take some more CPU time by setting other parameters
Thx for your help
Denis.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
news: 3dd12e24$1@news.povray.org...
> Actually the camera would be visible in the columns, were it extant.
>
Yes then the photographer as well :)
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
