Alright I've been messing around with a different boat that I built (this 
time I actually looked at photos of real boats!). I figured out the problem 
with the old one was very inconsistent styling, it had the smoke stacks of a 
huge ocean liner, but the scale of the windows was more that of a luxury 
yacht, giving the overall effect of a cute kids toy.

Now, the scale of this big one is a bit off, because from this angle a boat 
that's to scale would be beyond the crest of the furthest visible waves, or 
would be so close it completely filled the screen, so I've used a bit of 
"forced perspective" so we still get to see it interacting with some waves.

I couldn't really tell from my preview renders last night, but now this high 
quality one's finished I can see that the scale is too obviously wrong, and 
also a large scale disaster should have more debris than just one life 
ring... annoying!

So, I'm gonna have another bash at it, with some kind of luxury yacht or 
something. After all this huge ship only took an hour to model :)
-- 
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com

"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote in message 
news:45574a89@news.povray.org...
> Well in light of the recently announced IRTC topic "Complexity" I figure a
> multi-fractal based water effect is fairly on topic (perhaps?). So I've
> adapted this to be a more dramatic image.
>
> Changes: I've moved the ship further away and smashed it's windows, 
> there's
> some nice media to fogging and mist from the waves, and some general
> tweaking of the overall colours in the scene.
>
> Also, since it's been requested, I've posted the source in p.b.s-f. Enjoy!
>
> I think it's basically finished!
>
> What do you think?
> -- 
> Tek
> http://evilsuperbrain.com
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'ridgedmf.jpg' (236 KB)

Preview of image 'ridgedmf.jpg'

Tek,

I won't bother making any changes, I don't want to be a distraction to what
you are trying to do. I like the direction you are going and am very
excited to see your final image.

One thought though...do you need a boat/ship at all? You might have a very
powerful image on your hands with just the life ring.

Either way, this is fantastic work on your part. You certainly are inspiring
me.

Tim

"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
> Awesome. I think your materials need to be tweaked to suit my lighting, but
> that still looks pretty cool! :)
>
> --
> Tek
> http://evilsuperbrain.com
>

Post a reply to this message

"Tim McMurdo" <jod### [at] wohrrcom> wrote in message 
news:web.45589a247adb74e7acb32c570@news.povray.org...
> One thought though...do you need a boat/ship at all? You might have a very
> powerful image on your hands with just the life ring.

Interesting thought, though I started without a boat and it looked a bit 
empty. Plus I want something to show off the underwater shading so I need 
something there...

-- 
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com

Post a reply to this message

Tek wrote:
>
> Interesting thought, though I started without a boat and it looked a bit 
> empty. Plus I want something to show off the underwater shading so I need 
> something there...
> 

A shark and a red underwater "cloud"? :)

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

Post a reply to this message

"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
> Well in light of the recently announced IRTC topic "Complexity" I figure a
> multi-fractal based water effect is fairly on topic (perhaps?). So I've
> adapted this to be a more dramatic image.
>
> Changes: I've moved the ship further away and smashed it's windows, there's
> some nice media to fogging and mist from the waves, and some general
> tweaking of the overall colours in the scene.
>
> Also, since it's been requested, I've posted the source in p.b.s-f. Enjoy!
>
> I think it's basically finished!
>
> What do you think?
> --
> Tek
> http://evilsuperbrain.com

This is extremely fine-looking water; as Jim Charter mentioned, it makes one
(well, me, at least) question my own recollections of the ocean and waves,
and it provides an artistic rather than photographic interpretation
(although the realism is very good too). It made me think of Hokusai's 'Big
Wave' as well. Incredible. Also generous of you to provide the code--
thanks!

If I could offer any suggestion, it would be that the clouds should have the
same sort of complexity at several scales that the water does. I know this
is pretty difficult, though. I also think the boat detracts, because it's
so much simpler than the water. Maybe another organic object as well, like
a jellyfish, feather, bit of wood, etc...

-Stefan

Post a reply to this message

I agree with you on both points. The clouds & boat do look too simple by 
comparison. The problem is that the scene's a bit dull without them... 
although I suppose I could shift the camera angle... ooh now you've given me 
an interesting idea! An overhead view (so you don't see the clouds) with the 
boat fully submerged below the life ring (so the refraction through the 
waves hides the crappiness of it's appearance).

Though right now I'm rendering the same image as before but with a fairly 
detailed trawler-style boat. Anyway if that still looks a bit wrong I'll try 
that new idea you just inspired!

Thanks :)
-- 
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com

"Smws" <smw### [at] poboxcom> wrote in message 
news:web.45593c137adb74e745b35da20@news.povray.org...
> "Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
>> Well in light of the recently announced IRTC topic "Complexity" I figure 
>> a
>> multi-fractal based water effect is fairly on topic (perhaps?). So I've
>> adapted this to be a more dramatic image.
>>
>> Changes: I've moved the ship further away and smashed it's windows, 
>> there's
>> some nice media to fogging and mist from the waves, and some general
>> tweaking of the overall colours in the scene.
>>
>> Also, since it's been requested, I've posted the source in p.b.s-f. 
>> Enjoy!
>>
>> I think it's basically finished!
>>
>> What do you think?
>> --
>> Tek
>> http://evilsuperbrain.com
>
> This is extremely fine-looking water; as Jim Charter mentioned, it makes 
> one
> (well, me, at least) question my own recollections of the ocean and waves,
> and it provides an artistic rather than photographic interpretation
> (although the realism is very good too). It made me think of Hokusai's 
> 'Big
> Wave' as well. Incredible. Also generous of you to provide the code--
> thanks!
>
> If I could offer any suggestion, it would be that the clouds should have 
> the
> same sort of complexity at several scales that the water does. I know this
> is pretty difficult, though. I also think the boat detracts, because it's
> so much simpler than the water. Maybe another organic object as well, like
> a jellyfish, feather, bit of wood, etc...
>
> -Stefan
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot wrote:
> That's a thoughtful analysis, Jim. Thank you.
> 
> I suppose that all this is the reason why, when I saw this last image by 
> Tek, I was immediately reminded of Hokusai's Big Wave, or some marines from 
> the 17th/18th century.
> 

In fact, as soon as I read the title, and before I opened the image, I 
remembered this one:
http://www.irtc.org/ftp/pub/stills/2000-08-31/dmwave.jpg


But yes, the portrayal of water might be a fascinating subplot to the 
history of art, but I have never come across such a treatment.  I wonder 
what Gombrich might have said about it.

Also there are pictures like this that I grew up with and loved:
http://www.ago.net/www/picture.three/harris.jpg
http://tinyurl.com/ylzcm6

Post a reply to this message

"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
>
>
> ...but foam shouldn't be able to have sharp edges.
>
> I can't really think of a way to smooth off ridges in a ridged fractal, so
> I'll just try to cover it up with some mist/spray effects!
>

I'm just enthralled with your water.  It is *so* inspiring, and presents (to
me) a *new level* of the power of POV-Ray.

I've been doing a great deal of isosurface experimentation lately, learning
lots of new things, and there might be a way to alter those crests. The idea
involves "fading" one isosurface function into another, over a certain
distance.

What I'm thinking is this:
Fading in an f_noise3d function in the +y-direction, somewhere near the top
of the crests--to actually break them up with "bits" of tiny noise blobs, to
simulate spray. I *think* (but am not sure) that your water-wave function(s)
could be used IN the noise function, to actually vary the height at which
the noise comes into play (so that the noise doesn't just show up at a set
y-height.) I've gotten this trick to work on some isosurfaces of my
own...though not of the complexity of your waves.

My ideas are a bit tricky mathematically...and difficult to explain...but I
now have a methodology of sorts that seems to work, and that "makes sense"
to me.

I'll definitely take a look at your code--which I'm absolutely overjoyed
that you've posted--and see if I can do what I've mentioned. If successful,
I'll post an image.

Meanwhile, I'll work up a simple --VERY simple!--demonstration code example
(or two) and post it here.

Ken W.

Post a reply to this message

I had a similar idea, but the trouble is to fade in a different isosurface 
on the foamy sections you need to know where those foamy sections are, i.e. 
you need to modulate it by the wave function, and a smooth function 
modulated by a function with hard edges is going to have hard edges. As far 
as I can see this paradox is inescapable.

-- 
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com

"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in message 
news:web.455d57fe7adb74e76135df7c0@news.povray.org...
> "Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
>>
>>
>> ...but foam shouldn't be able to have sharp edges.
>>
>> I can't really think of a way to smooth off ridges in a ridged fractal, 
>> so
>> I'll just try to cover it up with some mist/spray effects!
>>
>
> I'm just enthralled with your water.  It is *so* inspiring, and presents 
> (to
> me) a *new level* of the power of POV-Ray.
>
> I've been doing a great deal of isosurface experimentation lately, 
> learning
> lots of new things, and there might be a way to alter those crests. The 
> idea
> involves "fading" one isosurface function into another, over a certain
> distance.
>
> What I'm thinking is this:
> Fading in an f_noise3d function in the +y-direction, somewhere near the 
> top
> of the crests--to actually break them up with "bits" of tiny noise blobs, 
> to
> simulate spray. I *think* (but am not sure) that your water-wave 
> function(s)
> could be used IN the noise function, to actually vary the height at which
> the noise comes into play (so that the noise doesn't just show up at a set
> y-height.) I've gotten this trick to work on some isosurfaces of my
> own...though not of the complexity of your waves.
>
> My ideas are a bit tricky mathematically...and difficult to explain...but 
> I
> now have a methodology of sorts that seems to work, and that "makes sense"
> to me.
>
> I'll definitely take a look at your code--which I'm absolutely overjoyed
> that you've posted--and see if I can do what I've mentioned. If 
> successful,
> I'll post an image.
>
> Meanwhile, I'll work up a simple --VERY simple!--demonstration code 
> example
> (or two) and post it here.
>
> Ken W.
>
>
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:

> But yes, the portrayal of water might be a fascinating subplot to the
> history of art, but I have never come across such a treatment.  I wonder
> what Gombrich might have said about it.
>


I saw a video by Neil MacGregor, then the director of the National Gallery,
where he discussed this briefly. IIRC water was a difficult subject before
the use of oils. When tempera was used artists could not get the
transparency needed. Maybe water is too dificult to paint to have much of a
history.

matchstick men)


Stephen

Post a reply to this message