 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"George Pantazopoulos" <go### [at] to myaboutpage> wrote in message
news:web.455c8036e4e3b873c0bad8570@news.povray.org...
> I'd talk to fidos if you wan't it animated. He's done some AWESOME fluid
> simulations (using his own computational fluid dynamics engine) in
> povray.binaries.animations
But then that would be an animation of a different effect, not my sea.
There's a fundamental difference between a simulation and a ridged
multifractal that I don't think can be ignored here...
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
> "George Pantazopoulos" <go### [at] tomyaboutpage> wrote in message
> news:web.455c8036e4e3b873c0bad8570@news.povray.org...
> > I'd talk to fidos if you wan't it animated. He's done some AWESOME fluid
> > simulations (using his own computational fluid dynamics engine) in
> > povray.binaries.animations
>
> But then that would be an animation of a different effect, not my sea.
> There's a fundamental difference between a simulation and a ridged
> multifractal that I don't think can be ignored here...
>
> --
> Tek
> http://evilsuperbrain.com
You've got a point, but have you seen his stuff? Check out his "Liquid
Animation" series
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com> wrote in message
news:web.455c6b93e4e3b873f1cb1e660@news.povray.org...
> Although waves are said to be fractal and it is difficult to get a sense
> of
> scale from them the foam defines the scale for me. I would say that these
> waves are no more that two meters high. (The lifebelt reinforces this)
> This
> jars with the scale of ship, to my eyes. You know RL often does not
> measure
> up to our imagination -)
> Can you change the ship for a yacht? (Shakes both hands in a Tommy Cooper
> movement :-). I'm sorry if I sound nitpicking but it is such good sea it
> deserves the best.
I think perhaps you're confused about what ship I'm using. if you look
closely you might notice this is no longer a huge ocean liner, I've replaced
it with a more appropriatly scaled trawler (as noted in my first post in
this thread).
To make this a bit more visible, here's a render without any water, and one
with the boat moved closer to the camera & life ring for comparison of
scale.
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'boatclose.jpg' (76 KB)
Download 'nowater.jpg' (51 KB)
Preview of image 'boatclose.jpg'
Preview of image 'nowater.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"George Pantazopoulos" <go### [at] tomyaboutpage> wrote in message
news:web.455c84ffe4e3b873c0bad8570@news.povray.org...
> You've got a point, but have you seen his stuff? Check out his "Liquid
> Animation" series
Yeah I've seen it, to be honest it's never looked quite right to me, sorta
like jelly (that's jello, for you americans).
I've seen better, check out the R&D video here:
http://www.scanlinevfx.com/gallery.html
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote:
> "Stephen" <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com> wrote in message
> news:web.455c6b93e4e3b873f1cb1e660@news.povray.org...
> > Although waves are said to be fractal and it is difficult to get a sense
> > of
> > scale from them the foam defines the scale for me. I would say that these
> > waves are no more that two meters high. (The lifebelt reinforces this)
> > This
> > jars with the scale of ship, to my eyes. You know RL often does not
> > measure
> > up to our imagination -)
> > Can you change the ship for a yacht? (Shakes both hands in a Tommy Cooper
> > movement :-). I'm sorry if I sound nitpicking but it is such good sea it
> > deserves the best.
>
> I think perhaps you're confused about what ship I'm using. if you look
> closely you might notice this is no longer a huge ocean liner, I've replaced
> it with a more appropriatly scaled trawler (as noted in my first post in
> this thread).
>
> To make this a bit more visible, here's a render without any water, and one
> with the boat moved closer to the camera & life ring for comparison of
> scale.
>
Yes you are right I was still thinking about the liner. Strange how after
BTW I asked a work colleague to look at
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/attachment/%3C455b17c1%40news.povray.org%3E/ridgedmf2.jpg
He worked offshore longer than me and when I said that it was a cg not a
photograph.
Endit.
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tek wrote:
> Really? Every time I've seen things underwater in the ocean it's been very
> hard to see any kind of distance.
It depends how warm the water is, as well as the rest of the effects. In
cold water, algae can live, and they're usually maybe 6 inches deep down
to four or five feet deep, because they have to avoid being exposed to
direct sun, but close enough to get the light. A storm would stir them up.
Down south, where the main source of opacity is inorganic life (i.e.,
sand), deep water stays clear near the top even in fairly violent storms.
Of course, the scuba still sucks after a storm, because the things you
want to look at are all near the bottom, not the surface.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Scruffitarianism - Where T-shirt, jeans,
and a three-day beard are "Sunday Best."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
George Pantazopoulos wrote:
> I'd talk to fidos if you wan't it animated. He's done some AWESOME fluid
> simulations (using his own computational fluid dynamics engine) in
> povray.binaries.animations
Completely different beast. There's a world of difference between
animating a blob and animating an isosurface.
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Still, the proportions are not entirely correct. The life ring is still too
large by about 50 percent I think at most. Probably a bit less.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlnet> wrote in message
news:455f2ac9$1@news.povray.org...
> Still, the proportions are not entirely correct. The life ring is still
> too large by about 50 percent I think at most. Probably a bit less.
Yeah, but I'm putting that down to artistic license :) I like the size of
the ring vs the waves, and I don't want the boat to dominate the image.
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Another version for anyone still reading this thread. It's not different
enough to warrant a full post.
I've tweaked the ship position, camera (it was spherical, it's not now),
water transparency, and better anti-aliasing (rendered at 1600x1200 and
shrunked).
I'm still not happy, I think this camera view just looks too samey, I'm
gonna go back to the view with the sky and improve that maybe...
--
Tek
http://evilsuperbrain.com
"Tek" <tek### [at] evilsuperbraincom> wrote in message
news:455b17c1@news.povray.org...
>A couple of different versions with a more detailed & more appropriately
> scaled boat.
>
> Opinions? I'm starting to get a bit lost on this project, to be honest...
> --
> Tek
> http://evilsuperbrain.com
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'ridgedmf.jpg' (217 KB)
Preview of image 'ridgedmf.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
