![](/i/fill.gif) |
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
first test of a cobblestone street
stones are isofunctions (f_superellipsoid + f_rigged_mf) placed on a heightfield
generated based on a pigment.
the sand between the stone still needs work (texture, debris, grass)
light is a simple point light (it's just a geometry+texture test)
any suggestions ????
... dave
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'cobblestone_test.jpg' (101 KB)
Preview of image 'cobblestone_test.jpg'
![cobblestone_test.jpg](/povray.binaries.images/attachment/%3C440c22bf%40news.povray.org%3E/cobblestone_test.jpg?ttop=441697&toff=4550&preview=1)
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
SORRY ...
posted the wrong image.
THIS is the on with isofunctions (f_superellipsoid + f_rigged_mf) the former
contains only superellipsoids.
Hope the difference is noteable ...
...dave
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'cobblestone_test2.jpg' (106 KB)
Preview of image 'cobblestone_test2.jpg'
![cobblestone_test2.jpg](/povray.binaries.images/attachment/%3C440c2779%40news.povray.org%3E/cobblestone_test2.jpg?ttop=441697&toff=4550&preview=1)
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Hello.
David El Tom <dav### [at] t-online de> wrote:
> THIS is the on with isofunctions (f_superellipsoid + f_rigged_mf) the former
> contains only superellipsoids.
> Hope the difference is noteable ...
Yes. The second one looks "nibbled by years" :)
I like sand, it looks very real. But I think, the stones colour and
grainnes should vary slightly.
Sincerely Yours,
Alex Kluchikov.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
"Alex Kluchikov" <klk### [at] ukr net> wrote in message
news:web.440c378d1e090c9e578f59590@news.povray.org...
> Hello.
>
> David El Tom <dav### [at] t-online de> wrote:
> > THIS is the on with isofunctions (f_superellipsoid + f_rigged_mf) the
former
> > contains only superellipsoids.
> > Hope the difference is noteable ...
>
> Yes. The second one looks "nibbled by years" :)
>
> I like sand, it looks very real. But I think, the stones colour and
> grainnes should vary slightly.
> Sincerely Yours,
> Alex Kluchikov.
>
>
The texture is interesting, but perhaps more castlewall, or decorative
paver.
Real cobblestones are somewhat rounded and used to bear traffic.
Originally they were derived from local river stone.
e.g.
http://www.pmb.ox.ac.uk/images/tour/TourOutside1.jpg
They age/wear to become smoothe and shiny. See e.g.
http://www.miksang.net/galleries/gal_waynewilliams/pages/Dublin-Cobble-Stone.html
For a description of distinctions between cobbled other forms of flint stone
paving see
http://www.jbsv.co.uk/norfolkflint.htm
DLM
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
> any suggestions ????
>
> ... dave
>
look my last irtc participation at:
http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2005-06-30/untitled.jpg
my isosurfaces were placed using trace() over an height_field i made with
photoshop
I hope that perhaps it serves as inspiration or aid you.
--
light_source{0,1}#macro C(r,p)cylinder{x*-2,x*2,.9 pigment { rgb
p} /* B Gimeno estoeslarealidad */ rotate p*90 } #end difference
{box {-1,1} C(z /* http://usuarios.lycos.es/game2413 */,x)C(x,y)
C(z,z) pigment{rgb 2} rotate 45 translate z*4} // www.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Both images are impressive.
It looks like it could do with more AA (or just a bigger image size),
but basically... it looks pretty good!
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
David El Tom spake:
> first test of a cobblestone street
>
> stones are isofunctions (f_superellipsoid + f_rigged_mf) placed on a
> heightfield generated based on a pigment.
>
> the sand between the stone still needs work (texture, debris, grass)
>
> light is a simple point light (it's just a geometry+texture test)
>
> any suggestions ????
>
> ... dave
The stones look a bit grainy - how about turning up AA (as another poster
suggested) and maybe fiddling with the texture to remove the black bits?
--
Stefan Viljoen
Software Support Technician / Programmer
Polar Design Solutions
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
David El Tom <dav### [at] t-online de> wrote:
> SORRY ...
>
> posted the wrong image.
> THIS is the on with isofunctions (f_superellipsoid + f_rigged_mf) the former
> contains only superellipsoids.
> Hope the difference is noteable ...
>
> ...dave
I think the overall shape of the stones is great, but the finishing could be
a bit better. I think that the stones would be more polished after being
used a bit. Making them a bit smoother and shinier should do the trick.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
DLM wrote:
> The texture is interesting, but perhaps more castlewall, or decorative
> paver.
To be honest, the texture is lend from stones1.inc (pigment in T_Grnt17a with
slight modifications).
The original render had far more less dynamic in colors. I raised it with before
posting it in order to see more details.
> Real cobblestones are somewhat rounded and used to bear traffic.
> Originally they were derived from local river stone.
> e.g.
> http://www.pmb.ox.ac.uk/images/tour/TourOutside1.jpg
> They age/wear to become smoothe and shiny. See e.g.
> http://www.miksang.net/galleries/gal_waynewilliams/pages/Dublin-Cobble-Stone.html
> For a description of distinctions between cobbled other forms of flint stone
> paving see
> http://www.jbsv.co.uk/norfolkflint.htm
wow, thanks for the references. Gives me good point where to start, even when
the Dublin reference seems to be basalt (nearly homogeneous black) instead of
granite.
It happend that I saw some worker's building a cobblestone sideway. Of cause
they used freshly broken stones. This was probably the main influence I had in
mind as I searched for the right look.
I have to play with the parameters of the rigged_mf function to get this
polished look on top and a little more grainish look inside the ditches.
I'm not sure if a supperellispoid is the appropiate base shape for a "pillowed"
cube. Maybe I've to blob a sphere with superellispoid or so.
... dave
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
aaglo wrote:
> I think the overall shape of the stones is great, but the finishing could be
> a bit better. I think that the stones would be more polished after being
> used a bit. Making them a bit smoother and shinier should do the trick.
yepp, you're right. Finish still needs work (especialy if it comes to be a
slightly wet look)
... dave
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |