Shay wrote:
> Povcomp is three months *past* completion. And if you believe I've 
> developed a sense of humor about it in that time, you are mistaken.

You know whom you are telling this, don't you? ;-)  It is not, believe me! 
Go and submit it, please!

	Thorsten

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter wrote:
> 
> Mesh or primitives?  Inquiring minds want to know.

All mesh, no primitives.

> A visual and technical feast!  Intellectually I would love to know
> how this morphed out of the earlier abstractions.  Obviously there
> are commonalities, but I feel there is something more too it.

All true. And there *is* something more. I wanted those free posters! :)
This is an improvement of my image for the original Povcomp.

> For  instance, in the past you have expressed a,... distaste, for
> the  idea of using raytracing to recreate from a photo source.  So
> there  is something almost relaxed about this one.

This is basic "model airplane" type stuff, but it's not from a photo. I 
still found a lot of room to conform to my visual tastes. The 
"composition" (of you want to call it that) reflects my intended 
ultimate use for the picture, a gift for the ladies at my favorite Bun 
Mi/pho shop. This is how the pagoda art (typically the Temple of Heaven) 
  looks in those places. Works for me, because it allowed me to use all 
of my RAM on the pagoda itself.

> The spatial achievements in your post exactly previous to this looked
> mindbending to me compared to this.

Thank you, and it's posts like that one which compelled me to post 
*this* image (not my original intention...too much like public wound 
licking). I have seen a lot of amateur abstract work lately and become 
very dissolusioned. Because it can be so technically easy to create, I 
think that abstract has become a haven for the technically 
unsophisticated. My capitalist nature tells me that consideration of 
such technically simple things must be *earned*. This is my payment for 
your future consideration. Hence my little inside joke, calling this 
post 'the difference'. I will spoil it and share that 'the difference' 
is short for:

"the difference between 'can't' and 'don't want to'".

...but I bet you'd guessed that already.

> I know you are into martial arts

No. Must be thinking of someone else.

> There is the idea of pattern.  Then there is the idea of pattern in 
> space, tactile pattern.  This raytracing, and this architecture, ( it
> is based on a real architectural style I'm assuming ) seems to embody
> that idea particularily well.

Hey, model airplane or no, pagodas are *very* cool. Still, wouldn't hang 
it on my wall.

  -Shay

Post a reply to this message

I am lacking superlatives
How many years did you take to code this?



41fab23f@news.povray.org...
> Hand coded. Procedural textures. Detail shot below.
>
>  -Shay
>


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






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

Post a reply to this message

"Shay" <s.s@s> wrote in message news:41faee3f$1@news.povray.org
> Slime wrote:
>>
>> Seriously. Submit this. Good stuff.
>
> Seriously. I know you mean that as a compliment, but .... you know
> better than that.
>
>>
>> I agree that the lighting could use some work -
>
> I'm happy with it now, but very open to suggestions in that area.
> If you mean the graininess and fuzziness, these are just byproducts
> of low AA/Rad settings. This is a one hour render (got to love
> mesh).

IMO the underneath sides of it (in shadow) need to be *much* darker.  This 
photo I took in sunlight and as you can see the bits in shadow are much 
darker.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'nara_2431.JPG' (99 KB)

Preview of image 'nara_2431.JPG'

CSG or SDL routine that creates mesh or something else?

Nice work.

Post a reply to this message

Shay wrote:
> Jim Charter wrote:
> 
>>
>> Mesh or primitives?  Inquiring minds want to know.
> 
> 
> All mesh, no primitives.

If I'd gone ahead and bet my chips I'd've won.  But I didn't bet them, 
did I?


> 
>> A visual and technical feast!  Intellectually I would love to know
>> how this morphed out of the earlier abstractions.  Obviously there
>> are commonalities, but I feel there is something more too it.
> 
> 
> All true. And there *is* something more. I wanted those free posters! :)
> This is an improvement of my image for the original Povcomp.
> 

I'm glad you were able to improve it.  In some ways you are just as 
twisted as I am.



>> For  instance, in the past you have expressed a,... distaste, for
>> the  idea of using raytracing to recreate from a photo source.  So
>> there  is something almost relaxed about this one.
> 
> 
> This is basic "model airplane" type stuff, but it's not from a photo. I 
> still found a lot of room to conform to my visual tastes. The 
> "composition" (of you want to call it that) reflects my intended 
> ultimate use for the picture, a gift for the ladies at my favorite Bun 
> Mi/pho shop. This is how the pagoda art (typically the Temple of Heaven) 
>  looks in those places. Works for me, because it allowed me to use all 
> of my RAM on the pagoda itself.


We've talked of these issues before. Anyway I noticed the framing and 
camera angle. (It would have be difficult for me, personally, to hide 
the actual topmost point of the tower as you do, but that is precisely 
what sets the image in motion.)  I noticed also your elegant solution to 
the "background problem". Just clouds, but very, very believable clouds, 
which don't let the viewer down when it comes their turn to offer some 
small visual relief from the intensity of the pagoda.


> 
>> The spatial achievements in your post exactly previous to this looked
>> mindbending to me compared to this.
> 
> 
> Thank you, and it's posts like that one which compelled me to post 
> *this* image

Whoosh, right over my head.


  (not my original intention...too much like public wound
> licking).

Oh is that what it is.  The timing was not lost on me though I didn't 
make the connection that it was your Actual intended entry.


  I have seen a lot of amateur abstract work lately and become
> very dissolusioned. Because it can be so technically easy to create, I 
> think that abstract has become a haven for the technically 
> unsophisticated. 

Fine, though abstract art, whatever the medium, always takes that hit. 
Here there is a certain miscibility between abstract and mathematical 
that other forms don't have so much.  So usually it is thought of a 
something about truth, form, or essence in some Platonic sense.


My capitalist nature tells me that consideration of
> such technically simple things must be *earned*. 

I would have said Puritanical rather that capitalist.

This is my payment for
> your future consideration. Hence my little inside joke, calling this 
> post 'the difference'. I will spoil it and share that 'the difference' 
> is short for:
> 
> "the difference between 'can't' and 'don't want to'".
> 
> ...but I bet you'd guessed that already.

I hadn't, but I get it.  It is pretty common, especially among artists 
who anticipate the less trodden path, to do something early on to 
eastablish their bone fides with the,... more prosaic minded, shall we say?

What is interesting to me about the picture is the line it walks between 
the worst of kitsch, exotic, travel photography ( which I am addicted to 
by the way ) and some of your more stringent conceptualizing.  ie the 
Temple of Heaven telescopes upward,... as the program loops.



> 
>> I know you are into martial arts
> 
> 
> No. Must be thinking of someone else.

Guess so.  Thought I remembered something about that you like to keep in 
shape but your paradigm was not athletics but rather fighting prowess.



> 
>> There is the idea of pattern.  Then there is the idea of pattern in 
>> space, tactile pattern.  This raytracing, and this architecture, ( it
>> is based on a real architectural style I'm assuming ) seems to embody
>> that idea particularily well.
> 
> 
> Hey, model airplane or no, pagodas are *very* cool. Still, wouldn't hang 
> it on my wall.
> 

Telling indeed.  A homeless picture.

Post a reply to this message

Shay nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2005-01-28 16:44:
> Hand coded. Procedural textures. Detail shot below.
> 
>  -Shay
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
WOW!!!
And to think that some fool said that POVers don't make professional grade images...
or that it 
can't be done.

Alain

Post a reply to this message

Shay wrote:

> Thank you, and it's posts like that one which compelled me to post 
> *this* image (not my original intention...too much like public wound 
> licking). I have seen a lot of amateur abstract work lately and become 
> very dissolusioned. Because it can be so technically easy to create, I 
> think that abstract has become a haven for the technically 
> unsophisticated. My capitalist nature tells me that consideration of 
> such technically simple things must be *earned*. This is my payment for 
> your future consideration. Hence my little inside joke, calling this 
> post 'the difference'. I will spoil it and share that 'the difference' 
> is short for:

Technically easy doesn't meant worse by any means. While I lauded your 
work on this and am quite impressed by the results I actually like a few 
of these abstract images posted recently, actually I'm thinking of some 
posted a little while back, just as much if not more.

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter wrote:

>>
>>> The spatial achievements in your post exactly previous to this looked
>>> mindbending to me compared to this.
>>
>> Thank you, and it's posts like that one which compelled me to post 
>> *this* image
> 
> Whoosh, right over my head.

I meant posts like my own post previous to this one. Everything I post 
here has been received *very* positively, but I wonder sometimes if I'm 
not painting myself as some purist curmudgeon substituting philosophy 
for chops. This one I think shows that I can have a little fun as well, 
and it's definitely "chopped".

> I hadn't, but I get it.  It is pretty common, especially among
> artists who anticipate the less trodden path, to do something
> early on to eastablish their bone fides with the,... more prosaic
> minded, shall we say?

Yeah, but the itch isn't *quite* scratched. I made this according to the 
Povcomp rules, so it's all one pass. I want to make something where I 
can cheat a little bit. Render in sections and paste the whole thing 
back together. Too big, as well. Looks good HUGE, but I want to make 
something that looks perfect at 1024x768. Every inch filled with details.

> What is interesting to me about the picture is the line it walks
> between the worst of kitsch, exotic, travel photography ( which I
> am addicted to by the way )

An almost perfect description of that look. I'm sure you've seen it many 
times in NYC. I would add 'reverent' somewhere in the description, this 
all having religious significance.

> Telling indeed.  A homeless picture.

Not forever. This will go into the pho shop. I might render it at work 
on the next three day weekend. Then there's affording the print and 
frame. It's on the list. You know how it goes.

  -Shay

Post a reply to this message

Remy Closset wrote:

> How many years did you take to code this?
> 

You are "[over]estimating the time to make...pictures". Worked for about 
nine weeks on the original. Another couple of days to get here. And one 
more for a new render this weekend.

  -Shay

Post a reply to this message