 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbrain com> wrote:
>
> So which would you rather see get finished?
Volcano...
--
Dan
GoofyGraffix.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Smws" <smw### [at] poboxcom> wrote in message
news:web.43d2ad6b1ad32b73641d079c0@news.povray.org...
> Well, I was going to say "volcano" because it looks more dramatic and
> well-composed right off the bat, but then I looked at the comet picture up
> close and boy- you really *have* that icy chunk texture! So I guess I
> would
> still say volcano- although I think the underwater vent might be hard to
> do
> without confusion- but it would really be cool to have those icerocks in
> there somehow.
I was thinking the same thing, I'm really pleased with that ice material.
Well the volcano has snow on it, and I'm making it a very wintery scene to
play to the topic, so there's no reason I couldn't shove one of those lumps
of ice in the foreground somehow.
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> schreef in bericht
news:43d1ea47@news.povray.org...
> Here's 2 work-in-progress images for the "fire & ice" IRTC topic, I don't
> think I'll have time to finish both, so I want an honest opinion on which
is
> better.
>
In the end the choice is yours, of course... My personal impression is that
the volcano is somewhat too obvious. Everybody is going to think about
Iceland or Mount Erebus on Antarctica. So, I expect a large number of
volcanoes in this round. The comet, on the other hand is more challenging,
perhaps a little bit less obvious for the topic, but full of potential...
and difficulties.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek wrote:
> Here's 2 work-in-progress images for the "fire & ice" IRTC topic, I don't
> think I'll have time to finish both, so I want an honest opinion on which is
> better.
>
> I have a slight preference for one but I'm not going to tell you :)
>
> The first image is a comet (in the top left, near the sun) trailing icy
> fragments which are going to fall to earth and burn up in the atmosphere.
> Obviously this scene hasn't got the comet-tail effect, and the distant
> fragments aren't burning up, so this one requires a bit of imagination...
>
> The second should be self explanatory, but in case it's not obvious: a
> snow-covered volcano erupts, the heat of the lava reshaping the cold
> mountain, meanwhile beneath the sea lava slowly flows out of an underground
> vent and solidifies almost immediately, the cold of the water reshaping the
> hot lava.
>
> So which would you rather see get finished?
>
>
As some sort of compromise, what about Io (Jupiter's moon) or an Io-like
moon in the picture?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>And I'd really like to see a volcano done in POV :-)
>>
>
> Here you go:
> http://oz.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/1999-04-30/jbpompei.jpg :-)
>
> Jerome
He I knew I should have searched before saying that ;-)
--
Vincent
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
My thoughts exactly. The volcano will be hard because lots of people will be
doing that, but the comet is a harder subject to do well I think.
Still, most people have sided with my personal preference of the volcano. So
I'm going to do that one and then try to leave enough time to finish the
comet.
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlnet> wrote in message
news:43d34691$1@news.povray.org...
>
> "Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> schreef in bericht
> news:43d1ea47@news.povray.org...
>> Here's 2 work-in-progress images for the "fire & ice" IRTC topic, I don't
>> think I'll have time to finish both, so I want an honest opinion on which
> is
>> better.
>>
> In the end the choice is yours, of course... My personal impression is
> that
> the volcano is somewhat too obvious. Everybody is going to think about
> Iceland or Mount Erebus on Antarctica. So, I expect a large number of
> volcanoes in this round. The comet, on the other hand is more challenging,
> perhaps a little bit less obvious for the topic, but full of potential...
> and difficulties.
>
> Thomas
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ah, but there's 2 problems with that: There's not enough atmosphere around
Io for the icy comet to catch fire, and there's no ice on the surface of Io
(as far as I know). So really it loses the point of both images! Besides I'm
not looking for a compromise, I think each image has enough in it already
and trying to combine them will make it crowded and confusing (to be honest,
I think the comet image already runs the risk of confusing people).
Thanks for the suggestion anyway, and feel free to correct me if I
misinterpretted your suggestion :)
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
"andrel" <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:43D### [at] hotmailcom...
> Tek wrote:
>> Here's 2 work-in-progress images for the "fire & ice" IRTC topic, I don't
>> think I'll have time to finish both, so I want an honest opinion on which
>> is better.
>>
>> I have a slight preference for one but I'm not going to tell you :)
>>
>> The first image is a comet (in the top left, near the sun) trailing icy
>> fragments which are going to fall to earth and burn up in the atmosphere.
>> Obviously this scene hasn't got the comet-tail effect, and the distant
>> fragments aren't burning up, so this one requires a bit of imagination...
>>
>> The second should be self explanatory, but in case it's not obvious: a
>> snow-covered volcano erupts, the heat of the lava reshaping the cold
>> mountain, meanwhile beneath the sea lava slowly flows out of an
>> underground vent and solidifies almost immediately, the cold of the water
>> reshaping the hot lava.
>>
>> So which would you rather see get finished?
>>
>>
>
> As some sort of compromise, what about Io (Jupiter's moon) or an Io-like
> moon in the picture?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
> Ah, but there's 2 problems with that: There's not enough atmosphere around
> Io for the icy comet to catch fire, and there's no ice on the surface of Io
> (as far as I know). So really it loses the point of both images!
How about Io (fire) and Europa (ice)? There's even a connection between the
two in that Io's fire is caused by the tidal tug-of-war with Europa and
Jupiter.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek wrote:
> Ah, but there's 2 problems with that: There's not enough atmosphere around
> Io for the icy comet to catch fire, and there's no ice on the surface of Io
> (as far as I know). So really it loses the point of both images! Besides I'm
> not looking for a compromise,
I know, but I was ;) (bad habit, I know)
> I think each image has enough in it already
> and trying to combine them will make it crowded and confusing (to be honest,
> I think the comet image already runs the risk of confusing people).
>
> Thanks for the suggestion anyway, and feel free to correct me if I
> misinterpretted your suggestion :)
>
The suggestion was more or less that including Io in a space image
automatically included the fire, because of its vulcanos, and as
you had already started modelling them for the other image...
I also like the idea of Io and Europa, but that would leave no room
for your nice icy comet particles, so we leave that for someone else,
I guess.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Io and europa has more potential. The trouble with Io and a comet is they're
2 completely independant bodies in space, that you've brought together for
the topic. i.e. you've got one picture of fire, and one picture of ice, but
nothing relating the 2. The main focus of both my images is some kind of
interaction between the two extremes, particularly in the comet scene where
the ice would actually cause fire when it burns up in the atmosphere.
But Io and Europa are interesting because they're 2 extremes orbitting the
same planet. Still, I'm not going to try that one I've got too many ideas
already!
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
"andrel" <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:43D### [at] hotmailcom...
> Tek wrote:
>> Ah, but there's 2 problems with that: There's not enough atmosphere
>> around Io for the icy comet to catch fire, and there's no ice on the
>> surface of Io (as far as I know). So really it loses the point of both
>> images! Besides I'm not looking for a compromise,
> I know, but I was ;) (bad habit, I know)
>
>> I think each image has enough in it already and trying to combine them
>> will make it crowded and confusing (to be honest, I think the comet image
>> already runs the risk of confusing people).
>>
>> Thanks for the suggestion anyway, and feel free to correct me if I
>> misinterpretted your suggestion :)
>>
> The suggestion was more or less that including Io in a space image
> automatically included the fire, because of its vulcanos, and as
> you had already started modelling them for the other image...
>
> I also like the idea of Io and Europa, but that would leave no room
> for your nice icy comet particles, so we leave that for someone else,
> I guess.
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
