>> (It's Stone8 from stones.inc. Unfortunately, it appears to have a
>> nonzero ambient setting. *sigh* So I will have to use some other texture
>> for the final render...)
> 
> texture {
>  T_Stone8
>  finish {ambient 0.005}
> }
> 
> I do that every time I use one of the stone textures, or they end up glowing
> too much.

I tried that, but it didn't seem to affect the image in any way... (But 
then, I tried to set it to 0.)

Post a reply to this message

>      Also, if that's 9 hours 'work' time, then you need to reduce that. 
> That's wasted chat-up lines...  ;)

:-P

No, that's 9 hours of render time. (And, as I just corrected myself, the 
image posted here is *not* the version that takes 9 hours...)

Post a reply to this message

>> The color of water is determined by what's underneath it because water by
>> itself is colorless. Have a look at a swimmingpool :)
> 
> Swimming pools are tricky to judge.  Every one i've ever seen is *painted*
> baby boy blue.
> 
> Water is colorless at the shallow depth that Orchid is rendering.  However,
> water absorbs light differentially by wavelength.  Red is the first to go,
> and green fades as you go deeper.  If your body of water is deep enough, it
> will show blue all by itself.  (Otherwise, the oceans would be the color of
> basalt and diatomaceous earth.)

I've heard this one before... Does water actually absorb light, or is 
this due to scattering like with the sky?

Post a reply to this message

>> Because, being a predefined texture, the parts that make it up are
>> actually declared in 12 seperate places and then gradually merged
>> together... heh.
> 
> Oh sorry I forgot that, I didn't use predefined textures for a long time,
> and now I remember that is one of the reasons :)

Oh yeah. ;-)

>> By the way, forgot to mention... 9 hours + 50 minutes render time.
>> (Can't wait to do the radiosity version!)
> 
> For the moment your scene does not need radiosity does it?

It does once you turn off the ambient setting on the sea floor. :-S 
(Actually, the radiosity version I'm working on is really quite nice. 
But... slow.)

>>> And what is this strange square on the left?
>> If anybody can figure out what the hell that actually is, LET ME KNOW! >_<
> 
> Strange

Uh, yes.

>> Weirdly, I changed the ground texture and the square vanished. Go figure!
> 
> Strange again

And also yes...

I can only think it's some kind of internal reflection issue, or maybe 
something about coincident surfaces...

Post a reply to this message

>> Because, being a predefined texture, the parts that make it up are 
>> actually declared in 12 seperate places and then gradually merged 
>> together... heh.
>>
> You could , like Alain did for metals.inc, change all the stones.inc ambient 
> statements and save it as a stones2.inc (or whatever).
> Solves the problem.

Actually, stones.inc simply contains this:

   #include "stones1.inc"
   #include "stones2.inc"

So maybe I won't be using your idea. ;-)

Note also that several include files also use colors.inc and friends to 
get their effect; changing "just one file" is way harder than it sounds.

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v3 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> >> The color of water is determined by what's underneath it because water by
> >> itself is colorless. Have a look at a swimmingpool :)
> >
> > Swimming pools are tricky to judge.  Every one i've ever seen is *painted*
> > baby boy blue.
> >
> > Water is colorless at the shallow depth that Orchid is rendering.  However,
> > water absorbs light differentially by wavelength.  Red is the first to go,
> > and green fades as you go deeper.  If your body of water is deep enough, it
> > will show blue all by itself.  (Otherwise, the oceans would be the color of
> > basalt and diatomaceous earth.)
>
> I've heard this one before... Does water actually absorb light, or is
> this due to scattering like with the sky?

http://www.seafriends.org.nz/phgraph/water.htm#colour

All you need to know about water and light.  I used this for the basis of my
underwater scene at the CGTalk lighting challenge "Under the Boardwalk".

I found it much more effective to leave the water perfectly clear (rgbt 1)
and use absorption and scattering media (no attenuation either).  Basically
you absorb the inverse of the water colour.  The colour of the scattering
(if you want scattering) should be based on the scattering particle colours
(i.e. dirt, algae, etc.).  In my example below you will need to play with
the numbers in the fade distance function (FD) according to the scale of
your scene.

-tgq

//START

#declare WCol=rgb <0.51373, 0.70588, 0.70588>; //water colour

#declare MWater=
  material{
    texture{
      pigment{rgbt 1}
      finish{conserve_energy  diffuse 0.0  ambient 0  reflection{0 1 fresnel
on metallic 0}}
      normal{P1}
    }

    #local FD=-(1000/(6*25.4))/ln(0.58);
    interior{
      ior 1.33
      media{
        absorption rgb 1-WCol //coastal
        density{rgb 1/FD}
      }
      media{
        method 3
        //intervals 12
        //samples 60,100
        jitter 0.5
        scattering{4,rgb <0.74118, 0.71765, 0.41961>}
        density{
          bozo
            color_map {
              [0.0 rgb 1/100]
              [1.0 rgb 1/200]
            }
            scale 1/2
        }
      }
    }
  }
//END



-tgq

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v3" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:452e7cc8$1@news.povray.org...
>> By the way, forgot to mention... 9 hours + 50 minutes render time. (Can't 
>> wait to do the radiosity version!)
>
> Actually, that's a lie.

     Liar.  :op

   ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v3" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:452e7d52$1@news.povray.org...
>>      Also, if that's 9 hours 'work' time, then you need to reduce that. 
>> That's wasted chat-up lines...  ;)
>
> :-P

    :o)  (I wasn't kidding either...)


>
> No, that's 9 hours of render time. (And, as I just corrected myself, the 
> image posted here is *not* the version that takes 9 hours...)

    Now I'm intrigued. Please post at your earliest convenience - I think 
you have an hour to go...


     ~Steve~

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v3" <voi### [at] devnull> schreef in bericht 
news:452e7f8e@news.povray.org...
>
> Actually, stones.inc simply contains this:
>
>   #include "stones1.inc"
>   #include "stones2.inc"
>
> So maybe I won't be using your idea. ;-)
>
<grin> I confess, I didn't check first  :-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Among other things, Ger saw fit to write:

> You're getting there.
> The color of water is determined by what's underneath it because water by
> itself is colorless. Have a look at a swimmingpool :)

Our swimming-pool is not painted, the walls and floor are just bare concrete
(a bit greenish with time). When it has been just filled with clear water
(from the well) it has a beautiful bluish-greenish tint which becomes bluer
(can I use this word?) after adding some chemicals (especially copper
sulfate). After a couple of months of use, and if we have been unlucky with
the weather (too many storms), the water is completelly dark green, and I
mean *green* you cannot see the floor and sometimes your own feet. With
some effort it comes back to transparency, but still with a blue tint.

Yes, I know about the chemicals, the particles and the algae, it's just that
looking at a swimming-pool is not the best way to know what colour water
has. Nevertheless, I always see a blue tint, in the just-filled
swimming-pool and in the bathtub (but it's chlorinated water), just look at
your own skin underwater, it doesn't have the same colour as outside.

-- 
light_source{9+9*x,1}camera{orthographic look_at(1-y)/4angle 30location
9/4-z*4}light_source{-9*z,1}union{box{.9-z.1+x clipped_by{plane{2+y-4*x
0}}}box{z-y-.1.1+z}box{-.1.1+x}box{.1z-.1}pigment{rgb<.8.2,1>}}//Jellby

Post a reply to this message