 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stefan Viljoen polard.com>" <spamnot@<removethis> wrote:
> Yikes!
>
> Why oh why do other ppl' WIP images -always- look better than mine?
Hey, I liked The Reality Disfunction - although that wasn't a WIP...
> Will this be something you'll release later? Scrumptilicious!
Probably not the source code for entire image that this flower will be part
of, but I might release the code for just this flower head eventually.
Rune
--
http://runevision.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Rune" <new### [at] runevision com> wrote in message
news:443ef46e$1@news.povray.org...
>I forgot to mention: There are some bright pixel artifacts a few places in
>the image. I don't know what is causing them. :(
Maybe similiar to a problem when sphere_sweep has a small diameter or short
bends between vectors?
Flower looks much like those silk and plastic fake ones; which is probably a
good thing since I'm always confusing the fakes for real flowers, especially
the ones with plastic(?) dew or raindrops added. But I'm getting better at
telling the difference.
I'm thinking the petals might be better if translucent. I've got some orange
tiger lillies here but they haven't bloomed yet or else I'd take a look at
them to check. Just seems to me that there should be light passing through
them.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Rune wrote:
>
>
> I'm not sure what you're referring to with tubular cross section here. Is it
> still the pistil, or are you talking about the "tube" that the petals form
> together? The pistil has no irregularity nor any texturing, so...
>
I meant the shaft|stalk|tube of the pistil. Could have sworn that it
was not a perfect cylinder or cone but rather that if you took the
cross-section it would be revealed that it is more irregular. Could
swear I see some faint shadows or striations running lengthwise which
could either be texturing or actual form. But obviously my eyes are
decieved. Anyway that only reinforces my original comment. That the
straight texture is probably accurate but combined with the plain
geometry doesn't quite make us think this structure was the result of
organic growth.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Really excellent work, Rune!
Everything has already been said, and better than I could, so just a smal
comment on the pistil. It seems to me that there should be a tiny
indentation at the top, and maybe very fine radial striation there too? It
should also be less shiny I believe. However, I have no example at hand, so
I write from memory...
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here's a photo of a Day Lily growing (last year) in my front yard ....
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'Day Lily Red.JPG' (228 KB)
Preview of image 'Day Lily Red.JPG'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Holsenback nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 15/04/2006 07:12:
> Here's a photo of a Day Lily growing (last year) in my front yard ....
>
>
>
>
Very nice photo. In french, we call those "lis" or "lys". Mostly white but also found
in many other
colours.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
Don't waste your time on a man/woman, who isn't
willing to waste their time on you.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Alain" <ele### [at] netscapenet> wrote in message
news:44410cf7$1@news.povray.org...
> Very nice photo. In french, we call those "lis" or "lys". Mostly white but
> also found in many other colours.
Thanks .... I posted it as a comparison .... I think Rune has done a
fantastic job! I'd be interested in seeing the finished work.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Here's a photo of a Day Lily growing (last year) in my front yard ....
That's a great reference image. Thanks!
In case you have the image in higher resolution, I'd appreciate it if you
could send it to me. But even as it is, it's of better quality then the
images of red lilies I could find with Google.
Rune
--
http://runevision.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Rune" <new### [at] runevisioncom> wrote in message
news:44416051$1@news.povray.org...
> That's a great reference image. Thanks!
>
> In case you have the image in higher resolution, I'd appreciate it if you
> could send it to me. But even as it is, it's of better quality then the
> images of red lilies I could find with Google.
I sent two images (red one posted) and an orange one .... I went to your
website and used an email address I found
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> I sent two images (red one posted) and an orange one .... I went to your
> website and used an email address I found
Yeah, I got them; thanks. :)
The email address I'm posting with on these groups is valid, but of course
the one on my web site is fine too.
Rune
--
http://runevision.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
