"Chambers" <bdc### [at] yahoocom> wrote in message 
news:43fb7ce4$1@news.povray.org...
> Much better than the second one, except for one thing: that pencil lying 
> there, all nice and straight, is really bugging me.  Just add a little 
> random rotation, and it will be great :)

   Hey, hiya Ben. Nice to see you around here again. :)

   Ok, well, truth is, that pencil looked absolutely terrible rotated. The 
straight lines were looking like they were rendered with no AA when +a0.0 
was turned on. In fact, this image is with +a0.0 turned on now, but with the 
pencil at 90 degrees - and it still looks kind of cruddy... :/

   To counteract this, I think I have the answer in actually scaling it a 
little bigger - and, if it doesn't work, I'll take it out. It was fun making 
the pencil though, as this is the first time I've made one... ;)

   Coins and envelope/letter next, but I thought of something else earlier 
that will hopefully be the icing on the cake.  :)

   Thanks for your comments, appreciated.

     ~Steve~




>
> ...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

"Stefan Viljoen polard.com>" <spamnot@<removethis> wrote in message 
news:43faa90f@news.povray.org...
> St. spake:
>
>> Phew! That was a long 2 hours!  ;)
>
> 2 hours is long for a rendering? I thought a 1000 is long... :)


    Lol! You ol' renderdog, you! :)


>
>> Ok, I've implemented Lance' deep rich blue as the background - not too
>> sure about it, but would appreciate other's thoughts.
>
> The first image was a great image, now this is a fab image! It looks very
> alien to me, both warm and inviting and glowing and ominous - very well
> done.

  Sheesh. I actually don't know what to say now... I'm speechless for a 
change. Apart from 'thank you' Stefan, much appreciated.

   *And* keep a lookout for updates...  ;)

     ~Steve~


>
> -- 
> Stefan Viljoen
> Software Support Technician / Programmer
> Polar Design Solutions
>
>

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v2" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:43fb6f84$1@news.povray.org...
> To borrow the catchphrase of a certain infamous American institution... 
> "I'm lovin' it."

   Thanks Mr Inv... !

>
>
> Definitely conveys "fire" much more strongly now. (Not sure about the 
> "ice" part yet... maybe some of the extreme edges could be slightly 
> cloudy?)

  Yep, you're right. I know what you're saying and I think I may have a 
little time left to try this for the comp.

    I'll follow this up anyway even if I don't have time...  :o)

     ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

>> Definitely conveys "fire" much more strongly now. (Not sure about the 
>> "ice" part yet... maybe some of the extreme edges could be slightly 
>> cloudy?)
> 
> 
>  Yep, you're right. I know what you're saying and I think I may have a 
> little time left to try this for the comp.
> 
>    I'll follow this up anyway even if I don't have time...  :o)

Some more thoughts, in no particular order...

You should either make the edges cloudy, or maybe put tiny water 
droplets / rivulets on the sides. (Keep it to the sides of avoid 
obscuring the flames.)

The flames should perhaps emit a *tiny* amount of red light to produce a 
slight hilight on nearby objects.

Perhaps add more orange / yellow to the base of the flames?

Post a reply to this message

"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message news:43fb65c6@news.povray.org...


>   The rounded drips (re-modeled now) are there as per Somebody's 
> suggestion, but I would like further comments on these...?

     *Trevors'* suggestion(!) Humph...

     Sorry Trevor.  (Man, I'm too busy...)  :o/

     ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message 
news:43f9ff6f$1@news.povray.org...
> I'd buy one of those to put on *my* fireplace! :-)

   Twenty dollars, fifty cents...  :o)

    Is that cheap??

    ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> I'd buy one of those to put on *my* fireplace! :-)

I wouldn't. It looks too live fire to be *outside* of the fireplace :O.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
   http://www.zbxt.net
      aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Stefan Viljoen <spamnot@ wrote:
> 
> 2 hours is long for a rendering? I thought a 1000 is long... :)
> 

Well yes for a draft oslt, but for a biiig image going at the background
it's not even near too much (well yeah, it's still long one). But kernel
panic after 1800 hours makes you mad for a while :/.

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
   http://www.zbxt.net
      aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message

Eero Ahonen wrote:
> Stefan Viljoen <spamnot@ wrote:
> 
>>2 hours is long for a rendering? I thought a 1000 is long... :)
>>
> 
> 
> Well yes for a draft oslt, but for a biiig image going at the background
> it's not even near too much (well yeah, it's still long one). But kernel
> panic after 1800 hours makes you mad for a while :/.
> 
The plasm-tube on brandher? I started to think about it, when brandher
said that my screen was dead..

-- Arttu "Blizzara" Voutilainen

Post a reply to this message

Arttu Voutilainen wrote:
> 
> The plasm-tube on brandher? I started to think about it, when brandher
> said that my screen was dead..
> 

Yep. Some memory error, I hope it's not physical - that would require
either removing some memory or buying some new (and one more reboot).

-- 
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
   http://www.zbxt.net
      aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid

Post a reply to this message