 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Something for the current IRTC round. Never mind the title, it will make
sense later.
Joanne
http://www.onewhiteraven.com
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'celestial.jpg' (269 KB)
Preview of image 'celestial.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
moody! but it needs a lot more contrast!
cu!
--
#macro G(b,e)b+(e-b)*C/50#end#macro _(b,e,k,l)#local C=0;#while(C<50)
sphere{G(b,e)+3*z.1pigment{rgb G(k,l)}finish{ambient 1}}#local C=C+1;
#end#end _(y-x,y,x,x+y)_(y,-x-y,x+y,y)_(-x-y,-y,y,y+z)_(-y,y,y+z,x+y)
_(0x+y.5+y/2x)_(0x-y.5+y/2x) // ZK http://www.povplace.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Good job, the contrast thing is a 30 second fix in post.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"fls13" <fls### [at] netzero net> wrote:
> Good job, the contrast thing is a 30 second fix in post.
Nope; Post-processing is a no-no for IRTC stills...
-s
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Joanne Simpson wrote:
> Something for the current IRTC round. Never mind the title, it will make
> sense later.
> Joanne
> http://www.onewhiteraven.com
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
Brightness/contrast issues aside, the media does look quite grainy even
with the current dark and low contrast version you show. This version
does have a nice mood to it, but the figure is perhaps a bit too
abscured by the gloom.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stm31415 wrote:
> "fls13" <fls### [at] netzeronet> wrote:
>
>>Good job, the contrast thing is a 30 second fix in post.
>
>
> Nope; Post-processing is a no-no for IRTC stills...
>
> -s
Actually, yes you can. I just double-checked the rules.
www.irtc.org/stills/rules.html#images
Rule 5.f.iii says (about the exceptions to the no-post-processing
rules): You may gamma-correct and contrast/brightness adjust the image.
The other two exceptions are:
5.f.i You may convert images to JPEG format.
5.f.ii You may add text information (name, title, email address,
copyright. etc...) to your image.
-=- Larry -=-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:
> Brightness/contrast issues aside, the media does look quite grainy even
> with the current dark and low contrast version you show.
It's _not_ media. See if you can work out what it is...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Joanne Simpson" <cor### [at] onewhiteravencom> wrote in message
news:web.448ca7188703c7727619dfe70@news.povray.org...
> Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:
>
>> Brightness/contrast issues aside, the media does look quite grainy even
>> with the current dark and low contrast version you show.
>
> It's _not_ media. See if you can work out what it is...
a dirty window pane?
nice mood btw
DLM
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>
> Actually, yes you can. I just double-checked the rules.
>
> www.irtc.org/stills/rules.html#images
>
> Rule 5.f.iii says (about the exceptions to the no-post-processing
> rules): You may gamma-correct and contrast/brightness adjust the image.
>
> The other two exceptions are:
> 5.f.i You may convert images to JPEG format.
> 5.f.ii You may add text information (name, title, email address,
> copyright. etc...) to your image.
>
> -=- Larry -=-
Well, I'll be. Wish I had read that more closely when I was entering ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"dlm" <me### [at] addressinvalid> wrote in message
news:448cce56$1@news.povray.org...
>
> "Joanne Simpson" <cor### [at] onewhiteravencom> wrote in message
>> It's _not_ media. See if you can work out what it is...
>
> a dirty window pane?
I believe it's a window because I can see three windows reflected in
it with something behind the camera.
> nice mood btw
Agreed.
~Steve~
> DLM
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
