gonzo wrote:
> Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:
> 
>>twenty-something hours render
> 
> 
> Wow! It's starting to look very good!  The flash falloff is much better and
> the remora is an excellent touch for realism.

Thanks Ron.

> 
> Only things that look funny to me now are the normal on the shark's skin is
> too pronounced 

I agreed it isn't quite right though I am not quite sure which way to go 
with it.  Right now it looks like wet seak skin to me.  It is a bump map 
so I can of course reduce the bumo_size.  The texture is created in 
Photoshop with custom brushes that I dirived from images of silhouetted 
tree branches I believe.  Right now the texture in that strange area of 
being closer-than-I've-ever-gotten, but still not "right"  So I cling to 
it.  IT's a matter of vision as well as technical I think.

and the water in the background should also have a light
> falloff with depth; the bottom of the picture should be a lot darker than
> the top, probably a dark blue-green almost black.

Yes I was playing with some of those effects back when I was 
concentrating on the lighting.  It is sort of a matter of balance. 
Pictures where you see the media effect have more of an overhead light. 
  Pictures with the strob light and severe falloff seem to have a 
clearer look with less media and debris coloring the water.  Those 
images have more tactility and visual punch it seems to me but loose the 
sense of immersion.  I guess I was trying to trade these effects off. 
Have it both ways.  Another envisioning issue.  I will have to revisit it.


> 
> Is the water color media? If so, maybe a gradient background behind it or
> maybe even negative lights below and behind.
> 
>

I was using the gradient at one point but did want to "model" the 
lighting in a cleaner way comceptually if I could.  Didn't think of the 
negative lights idea

The media is basically this:

sphere {
   hollow
   pigment  {
         rgbt <0,0,0,1>
   }
   finish {
         ambient 0
         diffuse 0
   }
   interior {
      media {
          absorption ...
      }
      media {  //bg color
         scattering { .... extinction ... }
         density {
		granite
		scale .1
		turbulence 1
		color_map { a blend }
	}
      }
      media {  //bg color
         scattering { .... extinction ... }
         density {
		granite
		scale .5
		turbulence 1.5
		color_map { a blend }
	}
      }
      media {   //large debris
         scattering { .... extinction ... }
         density {
		granite
		scale 5.5
		turbulence .1
		color_map {
			stepped with transparent color
			to get particles
		}
	}
      }
      media {   //pea soup
         scattering { .... extinction ... }
         density {
		granite
		scale .03125
		turbulence .1
		color_map {
			stepped with transparent color
			to get particles
		}
	}
      }
}

Post a reply to this message

Great Lighting
Very realistic....jaws



4346b4ca@news.povray.org...
> twenty-something hours render
>


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

Post a reply to this message

What is producing the speckles in the water?  Distant fish or randomly 
distributed particles of some sort?

Post a reply to this message

Skip Talbot wrote:
> What is producing the speckles in the water?  Distant fish or randomly 
> distributed particles of some sort?
several "layered" medias with granite densities.  You can see a sketch 
of the syntax in my reply to gonzo.

the "pea soup" particles were produced by the layer with
precisely this syntax:

media {        //pea
     scattering {
     	1,
     	1
     	extinction 1.0
     }
 

     density {
     	granite
     	turbulence 0
     	scale .03125
     	color_map {
         	[0.00 rgb 0]
         	[0.85 rgb 0]
         	[0.90 rgb <.004,.006,.002 >*1.4]
         	[1.00 rgb <.004,.006,.002 >*1.4]
     	}
     }
     samples 60, 100
}

Post a reply to this message

Rene Bui wrote:
> Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:
> 
>>twenty-something hours render
> 
> 
> The shark flesh seems always a bit rigid, probably something to tweak
> here...
> but it's well done Jim.
> 
Thanks, yes the shark is due another pass.  Both modelling and texturing.

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot wrote:
> "Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht
> news:4346b4ca@news.povray.org...
> 
>>twenty-something hours render
>>
> 
> Can I go to another swimming pool, please?
> 
> Excellent work Jim!
> 
> Thomas
> 
> 
> 
Thanks Thomas.  I haven't been commenting but I have been watching the 
evolution of your ice scene with interest.

Post a reply to this message

Remy Closset wrote:
> Great Lighting
> Very realistic....jaws
> 

Thanks Remy.  This was really my first foray into effects of 
media/lighting interactions.

Post a reply to this message

Skip Talbot wrote:
> 

> 
> Jim I am doing something amazingly similar with fish and splines right 
> now (although the project is on hold until school breaks).  You seem to 
> have been able to write it much faster than I have though.
> 

Fish do seem like a candidate for this.  Almost too easy was my first 
thought.  So I felt a little embarrassed, privately, when usable results 
proved elusive at first.  Even now there are certain steps in my methods 
that make me a bit queasy.  It works but I don't totally understand why? 
  The whole thing took much longer than I had anticipated it would.

And there is some awkward stuff in my design.  For instance when I 
produce the mesh I proceed along the length of the fish, but when I 
generate the UV's I proceed along the breadth.  It really requires more 
thought and comprehensive design than I put into it.

If I was able to proceed "faster" in your perception it may be because I 
have attempted similar things in the past, (a bird), and worked alot 
with splines and "grids" of splines with my attempts to produce animal 
coverings, feathers, fur, scales etc.


> The render look fantastic!  Your shark could use a bit of wear though. 
> Most good sized sharks have a few nicks in them.  Stunning nonetheless 
> though.
> 

Thanks.

Yes, as in all mimetic art, it is a matter of refining your observation 
of the subject.  I wish I had Rene Bui's acute ability that way.  In the 
home appliance store I work at they have a tape of sharks swimming which 
they use to demo the hi-def TV's.  I have been learning a lot by 
sneaking down to the "Home Entertainment" section of the store and 
watching that tape from time to time. You can sense things with the 
sharks moving that aren't so apparent in still shots.  Sooo.  More to come.

Post a reply to this message

"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht
news:434aa860$1@news.povray.org...
> >
> Thanks Thomas.  I haven't been commenting but I have been watching the
> evolution of your ice scene with interest.

Thanks indeed Jim. It started as a little funny game, and it evolved into
serious scene building. Possibly I am going to do a small series of room
scenes based on the same concept.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:
> twenty-something hours render

This is great, the debris and lighting are much better than the previous
post (which was still very good) and the Shark and other fish are
fantastic. I can't actually find anything to fault with this image other
than you need to do a 80 hour render at higher resolution ;-)

Sean

Post a reply to this message