 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>
>>Yes, I hadn't turned my full attention to that yet. I was hoping that
>>it has something to do with "major radius", "minor radius" settings on
>>the twig(?) tab.
>
>
> Hmm. Yes. Don't remember if I played really seriously with that. Will have
> to try.
>
I spent last evening on it. I don't think it is possible to totally
eliminate the gap.
On to plan B. Convert MakeTree to output mesh or hopefully mesh2. :|
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 03:22:36 -0400, Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msn com>
wrote:
>POV-Tree for the trees and shrubs
>Wings for the shoes and shoe topiaries
>CSG for rest
>
>This would be the ideal time to incorporate changes so criticism is
>welcome. Foreground around the base of the treee is obviously
>unfinished. To have ivy covering the ground there too is the current
>intention for that area.
The path doesn't fit the back/mid ground. I can't put my finger on it
seem mismatched with respect to the path, I think. Besides that, I
think you're getting a foot fetish, Jim :-)
BTW the greenery's looking good.
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen McAvoy wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 03:22:36 -0400, Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> The path doesn't fit the back/mid ground. I can't put my finger on it
> seem mismatched with respect to the path, I think.
Now that one I didn't quite expect. But in a way you are pointing to
the thing that was bothering me too, but I saw it in terms of the
coloring. This coloring was the first solution I was halfway happy
with, ie the red brick road way and the light facing, but I wasn't sure
it it would sell.
The blob is all of a piece, that is if I don't render the stairs, it
would flow continuously. So I wonder if that is it. That if the
expectation is that it would act as a retaining wall of sorts. If it
was truly a path, it would conform to the terrain more rather than being
geometrically regular. But if it is geometrically regular then you
should see the terrain conform to it? In a cultivated garden the
landscaper could actually have it both ways, I guess? So maybe I need
to either make the terrain more geometric to conform to the walkway or
the walkway more conforming to the terrain. Hmmm. Kind of a b---h
since that walkway was harder to do than I'd anticipated :( It's not as
if I didn't think of this before, it's just that I dismissed it with the
idea that the whole thing is a fantasy anyway. Something of a new thing
for me, this fantasy business.
> Besides that, I
> think you're getting a foot fetish, Jim :-)
Yeah, but that's old news. Melly nailed me on that one like four years
ago.
This is an idea I've had since the "Gardens" round. But I was unable to
complete the entry in time back then. Gilles, anyway, and I am sure
many others, have been using mesh data to arrange objects since forever.
I always thought the topiary idea was screamingly obvious, what with
the POVer's preoccupation with foliage generation and all, but I don't
remember seeing anyone else do it so....
Somehow this idea of a fantasy garden of shoes seems like some sort of
logical progression from the hundreds of paintings I used to do of shoes
propped up on their toes:
http://www21.brinkster.com/jrcsurvey/paintings/selectedmenu.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 19:26:01 -0400, Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom>
wrote:
>> The path doesn't fit the back/mid ground. I can't put my finger on it
>> seem mismatched with respect to the path, I think.
>
>Now that one I didn't quite expect. But in a way you are pointing to
>the thing that was bothering me too, but I saw it in terms of the
>coloring. This coloring was the first solution I was halfway happy
>with, ie the red brick road way and the light facing, but I wasn't sure
>it it would sell.
>
Yes the colouring but not of the walkway but the hillock. The texture
looks right if it is about a mile away but the path shows it is much
closer. This part of the image is hard to look at for me. Eye and mind
in conflict if you know what I mean. I like the lighting, the red
brick road and the water. I've already mentioned the trees and ivy I
think. The real shoes are a bit obscured by the bushes in the
background and I would like to see what they looked like lying
carelessly on the ground, at least one of them.
>> Besides that, I
>> think you're getting a foot fetish, Jim :-)
>
>Yeah, but that's old news. Melly nailed me on that one like four years
>ago.
Before my time. I only discovered the newsgroup when Moray 3.5 went
into beta. Anyway Tom has an eye for that sort of thing being a bit of
>http://www21.brinkster.com/jrcsurvey/paintings/selectedmenu.html
Thanks for the link, very nice to see some of your work. I am
impressed.
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht
news:42c08b15@news.povray.org...
> Stephen McAvoy wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 03:22:36 -0400, Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
>
> >
> > The path doesn't fit the back/mid ground. I can't put my finger on it
> > seem mismatched with respect to the path, I think.
>
> Now that one I didn't quite expect. But in a way you are pointing to
> the thing that was bothering me too, but I saw it in terms of the
> coloring. This coloring was the first solution I was halfway happy
> with, ie the red brick road way and the light facing, but I wasn't sure
> it it would sell.
>
Hmm... I wonder if one of the causes of this is not the exact juxtaposition
of the left topiary and the branching of the path/staircase. This breaks the
perspective view at a crucial point (for the eyes).
> Somehow this idea of a fantasy garden of shoes seems like some sort of
> logical progression from the hundreds of paintings I used to do of shoes
> propped up on their toes:
> http://www21.brinkster.com/jrcsurvey/paintings/selectedmenu.html
That is very good work, Jim. I believe that this may get people interested
in shoes you know! Quintessential, really.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot wrote:
> "Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht
> news:42c08b15@news.povray.org...
>
>>Stephen McAvoy wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 03:22:36 -0400, Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>>The path doesn't fit the back/mid ground. I can't put my finger on it
>>>seem mismatched with respect to the path, I think.
>>
>>Now that one I didn't quite expect. But in a way you are pointing to
>>the thing that was bothering me too, but I saw it in terms of the
>>coloring. This coloring was the first solution I was halfway happy
>>with, ie the red brick road way and the light facing, but I wasn't sure
>>it it would sell.
>>
>
> Hmm... I wonder if one of the causes of this is not the exact juxtaposition
> of the left topiary and the branching of the path/staircase. This breaks the
> perspective view at a crucial point (for the eyes).
>
The whole thing came about because I needed to do something with the far
side of the pond. I felt there needed to be some sort of wall or riser
there, just behind that featured topiary, precisely to give the eye a
reference point and to help profile the point where the topiary is
supported. Having a hill just recede away into the background along with
the converging lines of the surrounding walkway seemed unsatisfying.
Once I put the riser there, the need to have it extend into the hill,
somehow, was inevitable. I kind of liked the stairs sweeping down and
ending at the all important toe touch. But in the general case it is
well known that such convergences of lines in a picture are bad
compositionally. precisely because they interrupt the sense of
overlapping perspective. The least I can do is rotate the stairs around
the pond to the right some more or change the camera angle. Actually,
in my mind the wall was higher, but I wanted that sort of golf links
look too, with fixtures extending into the distance on a rolling green.
Maybe I want too much
>
>>Somehow this idea of a fantasy garden of shoes seems like some sort of
>>logical progression from the hundreds of paintings I used to do of shoes
>>propped up on their toes:
>>http://www21.brinkster.com/jrcsurvey/paintings/selectedmenu.html
>
> That is very good work, Jim. I believe that this may get people interested
> in shoes you know! Quintessential, really.
>
>
Thankyou. I believe there is a *lot* of latency involved with shoes.
If you look closely you may notice that I showed you the "selected"
menu. Inquiring minds may wonder what would be on the plain vanilla menu ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen McAvoy wrote:
> Yes the colouring but not of the walkway but the hillock. The texture
> looks right if it is about a mile away but the path shows it is much
> closer.
Yes I think you are right. I you are even more correct if I was to
render at higher resolution. Incidently I believe this is what makes
golf such a vexing sport ;) It is dreadfully hard to judge scale at
just those sorts of distances based on natural features. For references
I googled "golf courses' and similar. It seems to be the point at which
textures start to soften into broader patterns. In my picture a pov unit
is about a foot. The center of the pond, which is what all my objects
are translated and rotated in relatioin too, is 60 units from the bench.
The center of the main blob that the receding stair loops around is
200 units from the center, so 260 units from the bench.
Of course it is also true, is it not, that it is just these sort of
perceptual phenomena that European parks designers exploited to produce
the illusion of grand vistas?
I admit I was quite proud of that distant grass texture when I came up
with it ( based on the cells pattern ) But I also feel it won't "carry"
as is. I kept picturing adding people to the scene to reduce the role
it plays. Otherwise I need to figure a way to add more real vagary to
the surface. Cells reproduces the color patterns of distant grass well
I think. But it does nothing as a normal. Funny though, the island in
the pond is covered with real mesh-generated grass. At this resolution
it might as well be a normal.
Okay, enough blather, more work. Thanks for taking the time to bat
things around with me.
>
> Thanks for the link, very nice to see some of your work. I am
> impressed.
>
Thanks. Working to try and integrate this all into a larger statement
somehow.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 11:35:15 -0400, Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom>
wrote:
>Yes I think you are right.
As always :-) Ha!
> Incidently I believe this is what makes golf such a vexing sport ;)
>Of course it is also true, is it not, that it is just these sort of
>perceptual phenomena that European parks designers exploited to produce
>the illusion of grand vistas?
True, but what happens to the element of surprise the second time
round?
Guess the quote.
>I admit I was quite proud of that distant grass texture when I came up
>with it ( based on the cells pattern ) But I also feel it won't "carry"
>as is.
It is good, care to share it. After the competition of course.
>
>Okay, enough blather, more work. Thanks for taking the time to bat
>things around with me.
Yeah back to the oars, and no worries. I'm just happy to give you more
work :-)
>>
>> Thanks for the link, very nice to see some of your work. I am
>> impressed.
>>
>
>Thanks. Working to try and integrate this all into a larger statement
>somehow.
42 :-)
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht
news:42c168b4@news.povray.org...
> The whole thing came about because I needed to do something with the far
> side of the pond. I felt there needed to be some sort of wall or riser
> there, just behind that featured topiary, precisely to give the eye a
> reference point and to help profile the point where the topiary is
> supported. Having a hill just recede away into the background along with
> the converging lines of the surrounding walkway seemed unsatisfying.
> Once I put the riser there, the need to have it extend into the hill,
> somehow, was inevitable. I kind of liked the stairs sweeping down and
> ending at the all important toe touch. But in the general case it is
> well known that such convergences of lines in a picture are bad
> compositionally. precisely because they interrupt the sense of
> overlapping perspective. The least I can do is rotate the stairs around
> the pond to the right some more or change the camera angle. Actually,
> in my mind the wall was higher, but I wanted that sort of golf links
> look too, with fixtures extending into the distance on a rolling green.
> Maybe I want too much
>
Not easy. Try something with the camera, yes, that might help... In
addition, have you considered to delete altogether that part to the right
that branches off the pathway, just leaving it to sweep to the left and -
eventually - out of view?
> >
> >
> > That is very good work, Jim. I believe that this may get people
interested
> > in shoes you know! Quintessential, really.
> >
> >
> Thankyou. I believe there is a *lot* of latency involved with shoes.
> If you look closely you may notice that I showed you the "selected"
> menu. Inquiring minds may wonder what would be on the plain vanilla menu
;)
Yes, that's right! More shoes?? (I tried to peek, but was frustrated... :-))
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot wrote:
>
> Not easy. Try something with the camera, yes, that might help... In
> addition, have you considered to delete altogether that part to the right
> that branches off the pathway, just leaving it to sweep to the left and -
> eventually - out of view?
>
No I hadn't really since that would recreate the whole problem of how to
decorate that far side of the pond. Which was what I was trying to
avoid, putting benches and trees etc such as what the viewer is standing
among on the near side. Also, you see, as is it conceals what would be
a fairly nasty problem of having the convex round of the hill flow into
the concave curve of the pond border in some sort of believable way.
But the rough experiment would be easy enough to do so I will give it a
look. My own inclination at this poit is to construct a much nore
elaborate system of retaining walls. But while I think about all this I
will refine those foreground leaves and branches. Back to good ol'
MakeTree for that.
>
>
> Yes, that's right! More shoes?? (I tried to peek, but was frustrated... :-))
>
lol
http://www21.brinkster.com/jrcsurvey/paintings/menu.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
