 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Wasn't it Tek who wrote:
>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
It's not quite as complicated as that because your wave function
modulates the height, so you just need your blending function to be a
function of height. It doesn't need to know where the height comes from.
I quickly threw together this proof-of-concept. The actual functions I
use here are pretty naff, they just demonstrate a mechanism.
#version 3.6;
global_settings {assumed_gamma 1.0}
camera {location <0,5,-10> look_at <0,0,0> angle 40}
background {rgb 1}
light_source {<-30, 100, -30> color rgb 1}
#include "functions.inc"
#declare WAVE = function {f_bozo(x,0,z)*2 +y -0.5}
#declare FOAM = function {f_bozo(x*10,y*10,z*10)-0.5}
#declare BLEND = function {
WAVE(x,y,z) -
FOAM(x,y,z) * (atan(y*20)+pi/2) *0.35
}
isosurface {
function { BLEND(x,y,z) }
max_gradient 12
contained_by{box{-3,3}}
pigment { rgb <.1,.3,.6> }
}
(atan(y*20)+pi/2) goes smoothly from 0.05 to pi as y goes from -1 to +1,
so it adds more FOAM at the top of the WAVE. There are almost certainly
better functions to use.
--
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
That's still going to suffer the same problem. I'll try to break it down for
you:
The wave function has a hard edge
so the height has a hard edge
so anything modulated by either height or the wave function will have that
hard edge
And, as an aside, my wave function isn't actually a height function, it has
some overlaps.
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
"Mike Williams" <nos### [at] econym demoncouk> wrote in message
news:Iv3RkEA$IYXFFwU$@econym.demon.co.uk...
> Wasn't it Tek who wrote:
>>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
>
> It's not quite as complicated as that because your wave function
> modulates the height, so you just need your blending function to be a
> function of height. It doesn't need to know where the height comes from.
>
> I quickly threw together this proof-of-concept. The actual functions I
> use here are pretty naff, they just demonstrate a mechanism.
>
> #version 3.6;
> global_settings {assumed_gamma 1.0}
> camera {location <0,5,-10> look_at <0,0,0> angle 40}
> background {rgb 1}
> light_source {<-30, 100, -30> color rgb 1}
> #include "functions.inc"
>
>
> #declare WAVE = function {f_bozo(x,0,z)*2 +y -0.5}
> #declare FOAM = function {f_bozo(x*10,y*10,z*10)-0.5}
>
> #declare BLEND = function {
> WAVE(x,y,z) -
> FOAM(x,y,z) * (atan(y*20)+pi/2) *0.35
> }
>
> isosurface {
> function { BLEND(x,y,z) }
> max_gradient 12
> contained_by{box{-3,3}}
> pigment { rgb <.1,.3,.6> }
> }
>
>
> (atan(y*20)+pi/2) goes smoothly from 0.05 to pi as y goes from -1 to +1,
> so it adds more FOAM at the top of the WAVE. There are almost certainly
> better functions to use.
>
> --
> Mike Williams
> Gentleman of Leisure
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht
news:4559e4c6$1@news.povray.org...
>
> 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
>
I totally forgot that one!!!
>
> 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
Aah! Those two are beautiful! Very much my type of painting!
This: http://www.artrenewal.org/asp/database/image.asp?id=30208 is one of
the paintings I was thinking about.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Aah! Those two are beautiful! Very much my type of painting!
I always loved that the striated waves might be:
-the artifacts of his painting style of simplified solids
-waves caught in some mystic frozn moment
-waves actually frozen as ice
>
> This: http://www.artrenewal.org/asp/database/image.asp?id=30208 is one of
> the paintings I was thinking about.
>
Wow, I was dimly aware of these paintings if at all. And so very close
to Tek's image! Seems my blather was even closer to the target than I
realized :0
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht
news:455e2013$1@news.povray.org...
>>
>> This: http://www.artrenewal.org/asp/database/image.asp?id=30208 is one of
>> the paintings I was thinking about.
>>
> Wow, I was dimly aware of these paintings if at all. And so very close to
> Tek's image! Seems my blather was even closer to the target than I
> realized :0
Absolutely! I had this painting in the back of my mind, and when I saw it
again, I immediately thought: "Tek".
And yes, your analysis was very close to the point indeed. A great talent
you have for this (no kidding).
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek wrote:
> What do you think?
I was waiting to see if you would work more on the ship and the sky
to make them look more realistic. The water is completely superb, but
the ship and the sky are a bummer.
I would have nominated this image for the HoF if the ship and the
sky were better.
(Of course it's in no way up to me to decide what goes and doesn't
go there, but I would have mentioned this to the team for them to
judge.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> schreef in bericht
news:455f228d@news.povray.org...
>
> I was waiting to see if you would work more on the ship and the sky
> to make them look more realistic. The water is completely superb, but
> the ship and the sky are a bummer.
> I would have nominated this image for the HoF if the ship and the
> sky were better.
> (Of course it's in no way up to me to decide what goes and doesn't
> go there, but I would have mentioned this to the team for them to
> judge.)
I would not be surprised if Tek was coming up with something! :-)
It would certainly be eligible then.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlnet> wrote in message
news:455f29ad$1@news.povray.org...
>
> "Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> schreef in bericht
> news:455f228d@news.povray.org...
>>
>> I would have nominated this image for the HoF if the ship and the
>> sky were better.
>
> I would not be surprised if Tek was coming up with something! :-)
> It would certainly be eligible then.
Uh... have you guys seen my new post? (from some 3 days before your comments
here)
news:455b17c1@news.povray.org (hopefully that link might work)
It's an improved ship model, with a view which doesn't show the sky.
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek wrote:
> Uh... have you guys seen my new post? (from some 3 days before your comments
> here)
> news:455b17c1@news.povray.org (hopefully that link might work)
>
> It's an improved ship model, with a view which doesn't show the sky.
Doesn't show the ship either... ;)
What little is shown from the ship looks like just 3 cylinders.
Not very impressive IMO. :P
I like the point of view where the sky is shown. You get to see
more of the water, and an impressive-looking sky would complete the
image perfectly.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
>... there might be a way to alter those crests. The idea
> involves "fading" one isosurface function into another, over a certain
> distance.
>
>... I'll work up a simple --VERY simple!--demonstration code example
> (or two) and post it here.
>
Sorry for the delay. My demo code ended up being a bit more complex than I
thought, and somewhat off-topic; so I posted it as a new thread, here...
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3Cweb.45632ef1a91bd327dc4a63960%40news.povray.org%3E/
Ken W.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
