 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
A diamond is forever... and so was this render. 59 hours on a 1.8 GHz P4.
I used real world values and borrowed some from Marc Champagne, and then put
the settings up super high hoping for a nice picture. The gem model is from
gemcad.
global_settings {
assumed_gamma 1
max_trace_level 100
photons {
count 100000
autostop 0
jitter 0 }}
finish { ambient 0.1
diffuse 0.4
specular 0.8
roughness 0.003
phong 1
phong_size 300
reflection { 0.2, 0.1 fresnel metallic } } }
interior { ior 2.417 dispersion 1.044 dispersion_samples 30 }
I was wondering why some round brilliants have a bit of vertical spacing
between the crown and the cuts on the bottom and others don't. Is this for
different stones of different refractive indices. And what's with the
banding on the bottom of the stone? Any comments or suggestions for
improvement would be appreciated.
Skip
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'diamond2.jpg' (83 KB)
Preview of image 'diamond2.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
sta### [at] uiuc edu news:3fd26373@news.povray.org
Nice, but
> count 100000
I think that photons could be x10 more, and light could be positioned to
show better caustics
--
#macro g(U,V)(.4*abs(sin(9*sqrt(pow(x-U,2)+pow(y-V,2))))*pow(1-min(1,(sqrt(
pow(x-U,2)+pow(y-V,2))*.3)),2)+.9)#end#macro p(c)#if(c>1)#local l=mod(c,100
);g(2*div(l,10)-8,2*mod(l,10)-8)*p(div(c,100))#else 1#end#end light_source{
y 2}sphere{z*20 9pigment{function{p(26252423)*p(36455644)*p(66656463)}}}//M
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
You're right, increasing the photons helped, especially with that
troublesome bottom. 14.5 million photons were stored in this render:
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'diamond3.jpg' (82 KB)
Preview of image 'diamond3.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Skip Talbot wrote:
>You're right, increasing the photons helped, especially with that
>troublesome bottom. 14.5 million photons were stored in this render:
I disagree. The refracted colors looked much more realistic in the first
image. In this one they are to grainy.
Cheers
Eddie
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nomail@nomail news:web.3fd77b50c921a919420d35110@news.povray.org
> I disagree. The refracted colors looked much more realistic in the first
> image. In this one they are to grainy.
Probably so high photons settings would gibe better results *if* used with
non-point light source (small area light)
--
#macro g(U,V)(.4*abs(sin(9*sqrt(pow(x-U,2)+pow(y-V,2))))*pow(1-min(1,(sqrt(
pow(x-U,2)+pow(y-V,2))*.3)),2)+.9)#end#macro p(c)#if(c>1)#local l=mod(c,100
);g(2*div(l,10)-8,2*mod(l,10)-8)*p(div(c,100))#else 1#end#end light_source{
y 2}sphere{z*20 9pigment{function{p(26252423)*p(36455644)*p(66656463)}}}//M
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
