This is the first serious render i did on my new computer - nicely fast, 
only a few hours. :-)

I had some troubles with photons and media so i saved the photons 
without the media and reused them for the final render.  I will have to 
add some scattering to the water as well so the light looks more natural.

Nearly all the geometry (walls and ground) is meshes.  The somewhat 
jaggy look on the upper left is due to a combination of radiosity, 
media, area_light, aa and jpeg artefacts.  I am still not sure what 
causes the straight lines at the left side of the water.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 2 Sep. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'walls_test1.jpg' (102 KB)

Preview of image 'walls_test1.jpg'

On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 17:08:10 +0200, Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
wrote:
> I am still not sure what 
> causes the straight lines at the left side of the water.

Water ? I noticed water only because you mentioned it :-)
My perception was somehow focused on bright areas of the scene.
Have a fun with your GHertzes and GBytes.

ABX

Post a reply to this message

In article <rrl### [at] tritonschunteretctu-bsde>,
 Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote:

> This is the first serious render i did on my new computer - nicely fast, 
> only a few hours. :-)
> 
> I had some troubles with photons and media so i saved the photons 
> without the media and reused them for the final render.  I will have to 
> add some scattering to the water as well so the light looks more natural.
> 
> Nearly all the geometry (walls and ground) is meshes.  The somewhat 
> jaggy look on the upper left is due to a combination of radiosity, 
> media, area_light, aa and jpeg artefacts.  I am still not sure what 
> causes the straight lines at the left side of the water.
> 
> Christoph


It is very impressive ! But why did you use meshes to make the walls ? 
Wouldn't it be easier with macros scattering boxes ?

Noe
-- 
"Je ne deteste que les bourreaux" -- Albert Camus

Pour m'ecrire un mail, veuillez retirer PASDEPUB de mon adresse ;)

Post a reply to this message

Noe Falzon wrote:
> It is very impressive ! 

Thanks.

> But why did you use meshes to make the walls ? 
> Wouldn't it be easier with macros scattering boxes ?

I wrote a macro generating a box as triangles and used that...

A mesh is almost surely quite a bit faster than using boxes although i 
did not compare it here.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 2 Sep. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

I like where this image is going. It has a very spacious feeling to it.

Like ABX, I too did not notice the water until you mentioned it. Will 
the water be a key part of this image?

Christoph Hormann wrote:

> 
> This is the first serious render i did on my new computer - nicely fast, 
> only a few hours. :-)
> 
> I had some troubles with photons and media so i saved the photons 
> without the media and reused them for the final render.  I will have to 
> add some scattering to the water as well so the light looks more natural.
> 
> Nearly all the geometry (walls and ground) is meshes.  The somewhat 
> jaggy look on the upper left is due to a combination of radiosity, 
> media, area_light, aa and jpeg artefacts.  I am still not sure what 
> causes the straight lines at the left side of the water.
> 
> Christoph
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 


-- 
Samuel Benge

stb### [at] hotmailcom

Post a reply to this message

Samuel Benge wrote:
> I like where this image is going. It has a very spacious feeling to it.

Thank you.

> Like ABX, I too did not notice the water until you mentioned it. Will 
> the water be a key part of this image?

Probably not if you all fail to see it. ;-)

In fact i first had a version of the ground without it but it looked too 
dominant because of the perspective (the camera is quite a dilemma after 
all.  I would like less of the ground but moving the camera upward will 
result in the walls appearing less 'high' and rotating it upward would 
result in non parallel verticals).

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 2 Sep. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

Christoph Hormann wrote:
>> Like ABX, I too did not notice the water until you mentioned it. Will 
>> the water be a key part of this image?
> 
> 
> Probably not if you all fail to see it. ;-)

I guess it's due to the posted image being too high to fit a typical 
user's screen. I had to scroll to see it.

> In fact i first had a version of the ground without it but it looked too 
> dominant because of the perspective (the camera is quite a dilemma after 
> all.  I would like less of the ground but moving the camera upward will 
> result in the walls appearing less 'high' and rotating it upward would 
> result in non parallel verticals).

I would leave the perspective as it is now, but I would close the bright 
gap on the left (the strong contrast hinders the eye from seeing details 
in the dark, which at least for me is visually disturbing), and perhaps 
  illuminate the water a bit - but only a tiny little bit, just enough 
to make it recognizable as water at first sight.

-- 
(defun f(p x)(If(Eq x nil)nil(If(p(Car x))(Cons(Car x)(f p(Cdr x)))(f p
(Cdr x)))))(defun q(x)(Q nil x))(defun Q(a x)(If(Eq x nil)a(Q(Cons(Car
x)(Q a(f(Lt(Car x))(Cdr x))))(f(Gt(Car x))(Cdr x)))))

Post a reply to this message

The image is a good start with lots of potential. The walls remind me of the
interior design work of architects Frank Loyd Wright and Walter Burley
Griffin.

Christoph Hormann wrote:
>In fact i first had a version of the ground without it but it looked too
>dominant because of the perspective (the camera is quite a dilemma after
>all.  I would like less of the ground but moving the camera upward will
>result in the walls appearing less 'high' and rotating it upward would
>result in non parallel verticals).

Hopefully someone will create a patch for perspective correction or a camera
type that performs like a traditional wide format "tilt" camera. This would
greatly expand the artistic posibilities of POV.

no13

Post a reply to this message

no13 <pov### [at] no13net> wrote in message
news:web.3f85f6d2e32c7442a0dca75e0@news.povray.org...
> Christoph Hormann wrote:
> >In fact i first had a version of the ground without it but it looked too
> >dominant because of the perspective (the camera is quite a dilemma after
> >all.  I would like less of the ground but moving the camera upward will
> >result in the walls appearing less 'high' and rotating it upward would
> >result in non parallel verticals).
>
> Hopefully someone will create a patch for perspective correction or a
camera
> type that performs like a traditional wide format "tilt" camera. This
would
> greatly expand the artistic posibilities of POV.

John Guthkelch (Doctor John) wrote an architectural field camera macro that
works quite well to keep the verticals...
http://news.povray.org/povray.text.scene-files/29463/

RG

Post a reply to this message

On Thu,  9 Oct 2003 20:01:22 EDT, "no13" <pov### [at] no13net> wrote:
> Hopefully someone will create a patch for perspective correction or a camera
> type that performs like a traditional wide format "tilt" camera. This would
> greatly expand the artistic posibilities of POV.

There is a different solution prepared for MegaPOV 1.1. It's user-defined
camera which allow cameras of any kind trough functions. See:
http://news.povray.org/search/?s=user_defined

ABX

Post a reply to this message