 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Just playing with 3.7 beta 2 and came up with this. Isosurface, media,
refraction, sky_sphere.
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'blueblob.jpg' (111 KB)
Preview of image 'blueblob.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Love it! I think I see my new desktop wallpaper. Any chance you would
share the source? Does it require 3.7 beta 2?
Slime wrote:
> Just playing with 3.7 beta 2 and came up with this. Isosurface, media,
> refraction, sky_sphere.
>
> - Slime
> [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Beautiful and unique!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Love it! I think I see my new desktop wallpaper. Any chance you would
> share the source? Does it require 3.7 beta 2?
Thanks. =)
Shouldn't require 3.7; here's the source:
// +w1280 +h502 +AM2 +A0.1 +R3
global_settings {
max_trace_level 100
}
light_source {
<0,1,-1>*999
rgb 1
}
camera {
location -10*z
right x * image_width/image_height // intended: 2.55
up y
look_at z
}
sky_sphere {
pigment {
gradient y
color_map {
[0 rgb <0.2, 0.3, .65>*.7]
[1 rgb <0.7, 1.2, 1.3>*1.1]
}
scale 2
translate -y
}
}
#include "functions.inc"
#declare scurve = function(x) {x*x*(3-2*x)};
isosurface {
function {
(f_noise_generator(x*5,y*5,z*5+20,2)-.4) +
.4 * curve(max((pow(x*x + y*y + z*z,.5)-.7)/.3, 0)) // (round off edges)
}
max_gradient 4
accuracy .001
contained_by {
sphere{0,1}
//box {<-1,-1,-.01>,1}
}
all_intersections
texture {
pigment {rgbt 1}
finish {
specular .45
roughness .01
}
}
interior {
ior 1.1
media {
emission <.2,.65,.8>*.08
absorption .05
}
}
hollow
rotate -40*y
rotate -30*x
scale 9
translate <2.5,-3.5,0>
}
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Slime" <fak### [at] email address> wrote in message
news:426d9af6$1@news.povray.org...
> > Love it! I think I see my new desktop wallpaper. Any chance you would
> > share the source? Does it require 3.7 beta 2?
>
> Thanks. =)
>
> Shouldn't require 3.7; here's the source:
>
<snip>
> isosurface {
> function {
> (f_noise_generator(x*5,y*5,z*5+20,2)-.4) +
> .4 * curve(max((pow(x*x + y*y + z*z,.5)-.7)/.3, 0)) // (round off edges)
<------
> }
<snip>
I saw your image and thought WOW, and had to take a look for myself :)
I've tried to run the code, but it errors on the line i have marked. It
complains about the curve function. I'm running beta 2 of version 3.7 but
with no luck...
Any ideas?
Cheers Dre
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I've tried to run the code, but it errors on the line i have marked. It
> complains about the curve function.
Serves me right for trying to edit it before posting. That should be
'scurve', the function defined a few lines earlier.
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Slime" <fak### [at] emailaddress> wrote in message
news:426dab6b$1@news.povray.org...
> > I've tried to run the code, but it errors on the line i have marked. It
> > complains about the curve function.
>
> Serves me right for trying to edit it before posting. That should be
> 'scurve', the function defined a few lines earlier.
>
> - Slime
> [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
>
>
Doh! and serves me right for asking stupid questions before checking it out
fully :)
I *should* have picked that!
Thanks again!
Cheers Dre
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Slime a écrit :
> Just playing with 3.7 beta 2 and came up with this. Isosurface, media,
> refraction, sky_sphere.
>
> - Slime
> [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
>
>
>
Hey, I love it! !!!
Could you render it in 1440x900, I want to put it as my new wallpaper
without having to alter the picture quality !
--
Dark Skull Software
http://www.darkskull.net
A+
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Re-rendered at 1600x1200 and installed as my wallpaper. Beautiful and
likely to keep me occupied tweaking, modifying, and maybe even
understanding for weeks. Thank you!
Now where did I hide that dolphin model... ?
Slime wrote:
>>I've tried to run the code, but it errors on the line i have marked. It
>>complains about the curve function.
>
>
> Serves me right for trying to edit it before posting. That should be
> 'scurve', the function defined a few lines earlier.
>
> - Slime
> [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Could you render it in 1440x900, I want to put it as my new wallpaper
> without having to alter the picture quality !
You can render it in any resolution you want if you use the source code
provided in my other post. =)
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And it renders fairly quickly - with no AA on my lowly P-III laptop, it
took about 30 minutes at 1400x1050.
Very nice piece of work, going to have fun exploring the 'how it works'
aspect later. :-)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Great, Slime!
Here's 1280 x 960
DLM
"Marneus Calgar" <nos### [at] pleasecom> wrote in message
news:426de801$1@news.povray.org...
> Slime a écrit :
>> Just playing with 3.7 beta 2 and came up with this. Isosurface, media,
>> refraction, sky_sphere.
>>
>> - Slime
>> [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
>>
>>
>>
> Hey, I love it! !!!
>
> Could you render it in 1440x900, I want to put it as my new wallpaper
> without having to alter the picture quality !
>
> --
> Dark Skull Software
> http://www.darkskull.net
>
> A+
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'slime.jpg' (220 KB)
Preview of image 'slime.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Slime a écrit :
>>Could you render it in 1440x900, I want to put it as my new wallpaper
>>without having to alter the picture quality !
>
>
> You can render it in any resolution you want if you use the source code
> provided in my other post. =)
Oh, i had'nt seen it ^^
--
Dark Skull Software
http://www.darkskull.net
A+
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
dlm a écrit :
> Great, Slime!
> Here's 1280 x 960
> DLM
Thank you !
--
Dark Skull Software
http://www.darkskull.net
A+
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
MOST impressive...
You know that "challenge" I "posted" in off-topic? I think you just won
it! ;-)
Now how come when I fiddle with POV-Ray I never accidentally produce
something this cool? Heh. Maybe I don't fiddle for long enough... LOL!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 15:07:10 -0600, Jim Henderson wrote:
> And it renders fairly quickly - with no AA on my lowly P-III laptop, it
> took about 30 minutes at 1400x1050.
Of course, *with* AA it takes just *slightly* longer to render. ;-)
Now it's running on a Dual Processor HT 2.4 GHz Xeon system (wish there
was a beta of 3.7 for Linux), and after almost 85 hours, it's on line 240
out of 1050. This was with AA set to a threshold of 0.1, depth 9, and
jitter 1.0.
It looks very good so far.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Of course, *with* AA it takes just *slightly* longer to render. ;-)
Yep.
> Now it's running on a Dual Processor HT 2.4 GHz Xeon system (wish there
> was a beta of 3.7 for Linux), and after almost 85 hours, it's on line 240
> out of 1050. This was with AA set to a threshold of 0.1, depth 9, and
> jitter 1.0.
Depth 9? :-0
> It looks very good so far.
Uh... yeah, I *bet* it does!
(I've never tried a depth of more than 5 myself... OTOH, never tried
different depths to compare the result either!)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 30 Apr 2005 19:50:16 +0100, Emerald Orchid wrote:
>> Of course, *with* AA it takes just *slightly* longer to render. ;-)
>
> Yep.
>
>> Now it's running on a Dual Processor HT 2.4 GHz Xeon system (wish there
>> was a beta of 3.7 for Linux), and after almost 85 hours, it's on line
>> 240 out of 1050. This was with AA set to a threshold of 0.1, depth 9,
>> and jitter 1.0.
>
> Depth 9? :-0
Yeah, I normally don't use anything beyond depth 5 myself, but I thought
I'd see what this "new-to-me" machine could do. :-)
>> It looks very good so far.
>
> Uh... yeah, I *bet* it does!
I'll put a copy of it somewhere where it can be pulled if anyone's
interested - when it's done (should be another week or so at this rate <G>)
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I thought some might be interested in knowing that this render *finally*
finished (last night around 11 PM local time). I actually stopped and
restarted a couple of times (system upgrades, actually), but only had
about 3 hours downtime between the start and the end.
The final hour count was 3153 hours (render time of 131 days 9 hours). I
did try to run it at the highest processor priority (nice level -19) most
of the time, but didn't run it that way continuously.
I'm now rerunning at a depth of 3; after 15 minutes, it's about a quarter
of the way finished. I'm going to be interested to see if the differences
are visible at all...
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 15:10:52 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom>
wrote:
> I thought some might be interested in knowing that this render *finally*
> finished (last night around 11 PM local time). I actually stopped and
> restarted a couple of times (system upgrades, actually), but only had
> about 3 hours downtime between the start and the end.
>
> The final hour count was 3153 hours (render time of 131 days 9 hours). I
> did try to run it at the highest processor priority (nice level -19) most
> of the time, but didn't run it that way continuously.
>
> I'm now rerunning at a depth of 3; after 15 minutes, it's about a quarter
> of the way finished. I'm going to be interested to see if the
> differences
> are visible at all...
>
> Jim
How can you say this AND NOT POST THE IMAGE!?!?!
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 15:57:32 -0400, Tyler Eaves wrote:
> How can you say this AND NOT POST THE IMAGE!?!?!
Sorry, meant to include a link - I've had problems posting images here
using Mozilla in the past. :-)
http://hendersj.dyndns.org/short/blueblob-9x9.html is the ray depth 9
image. The other is still going, about 90% complete. I'll add it to the
parent album when it's completed, but so far, it's looking identical to
the other. I'm going to do a binary diff on it to see if there's any real
difference.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 19:33:21 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom>
wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 15:57:32 -0400, Tyler Eaves wrote:
>
>> How can you say this AND NOT POST THE IMAGE!?!?!
>
> Sorry, meant to include a link - I've had problems posting images here
> using Mozilla in the past. :-)
>
VERY cool! The full size version is my new background. But 3000
hours....yeesh. Were you rendering on a 486 or something?
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 19:53:50 -0400, Tyler Eaves wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 19:33:21 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom>
> wrote:
>
>> [quoted text muted]
> VERY cool! The full size version is my new background. But 3000
> hours....yeesh. Were you rendering on a 486 or something?
Dual Xeon, 2.4 GHz per processor. +R9 is what made it take so long
(that's the AA depth, and is the maximum value). The +R3 version finished
after a little over 6 hours.
Visibly, there's not much difference.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
