POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.binaries.images : Ruined Place - WIP 3 Server Time
2 Aug 2024 02:25:17 EDT (-0400)
  Ruined Place - WIP 3 (Message 11 to 20 of 30)  
<<< Previous 10 Messages Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 10 Messages >>>
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Ruined Place - WIP 3
Date: 15 Feb 2008 04:49:09
Message: <47b56015@news.povray.org>
"Jim Charter" <jrc### [at] msncom> schreef in bericht 
news:47b5144d$1@news.povray.org...
>
> Looking better and better.  I think it mostly needs more variation between 
> stones and areas.

Thanks Jim. I am still not really happy with this although there is 
improvement. Yes, variation is needed and easy to do (implemented now to 
some extend; see below).

>
> Not sure what you mean by 'crackle solid' pattern.  Are you using a none 
> standard form?  What this actually reminds me of is the 'cells' pattern 
> which might be something worth trying too.

To simulate the lichen I used a color_map with crackle solid. Here is the 
macro code (state of the art) I used for the tiles. You only need to define 
a parameter T (here: 0.4), a seed value for the parameter RR, and include 
rand.inc. Note that I lowered the diffuse value of the lichen to 0.5. A 
quick render shows this to be much better. The lichen now blends better with 
the surrounding stone.

//-- Start Code --
#macro StoneTex()
#declare PLichen =
pigment {
  crackle solid
  color_map {
    [0.45 rgbf <1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0> ]
    [0.50 rgb <249, 224, 142>/255 ]
    [0.55 rgb <163, 149,  26>/255 ]
     [0.555 rgbf <1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0> ]
    [0.60 rgb <215, 172,  67>/255 ]
    [0.65 rgb <124,  82,   0>/255 ]
     [0.655 rgbf <1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0> ]
    [0.70 rgb <255, 217, 126>/255 ]
    [0.75 rgb <155, 111,  50>/255 ]
     [0.755 rgbf <1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0> ]
    [0.80 rgb <176, 155,  98>/255 ]
    [0.85 rgb <126, 106,  53>/255 ]
     [0.855 rgbf <1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0> ]
    [0.90 rgb <249, 224, 142>/255 ]
    [0.95 rgb <163, 149,  26>/255 ]
  }
  scale  <1.0, 1.0, 1.0>*0.02
  warp {turbulence 0.1}
}

#local Amount = RRand(T-0.1, T+0.1, RR);

#declare TLichen =
texture {
  pigment {
    granite
    pigment_map {
      [Amount color rgbf <1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0> ]
      [Amount PLichen]
    }
    //scale  <1.0, 1.0, 2.0>*0.1
    //warp {turbulence <1.0, 1.0, 1.0>}
  }
  normal {
    crackle 10.0 solid
    bump_size 2.0
    scale 0.01
    //warp {turbulence <1.0, 1.0, 1.0>}
  }
  finish {
    ambient 0.0
    diffuse 0.5
  }
}

#declare LichenLimestone =
material {
   // Limestone:
   texture {
      pigment {
         agate
         agate_turb 1.0
         pigment_map {
            [0.0   color rgb <1.0, 1.0, 1.0>*0.3]
            [0.4   color rgb <0.6, 0.6, 0.6>*0.3]
            [0.8   color rgb <0.9, 0.9, 0.9>*0.3]
            [1.0   color rgb <0.7, 0.7, 0.7>*0.3]
         }
         scale  <3.0, 0.3, 1.0>*0.05
         rotate    <-10.0, 0.0, 15.0>
      }
      normal {
         crackle 10 solid
         warp {turbulence 0.5}
         scale 0.2
      }
      finish {
         ambient 0.0
         brilliance 0.5
         specular 0.3525
         roughness 0.005
      }
   }
   // Lichen:
   texture {TLichen}
}

#end

//-- End Code --

>
> Now you've gotten me googling antique ruins.  They really are powerful 
> images.

Fascinating indeed. High potential for interesting scenes but also fairly 
difficult to do correctly is my own feeling.

Thomas


Post a reply to this message

From: Warp
Subject: Re: Ruined Place - WIP 3
Date: 15 Feb 2008 05:17:43
Message: <47b566c7@news.povray.org>
Hmm, I'm not completely convinced by this. Actual ruins look more
like: http://www.risawn.com/blog2/greece/gr3_29.jpg


Post a reply to this message

From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Ruined Place - WIP 3
Date: 15 Feb 2008 07:31:54
Message: <47b5863a@news.povray.org>
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> schreef in bericht 
news:47b566c7@news.povray.org...
>  Hmm, I'm not completely convinced by this. Actual ruins look more
> like: http://www.risawn.com/blog2/greece/gr3_29.jpg

Oh yes indeed! or this: 
http://jfbradu.free.fr/GRECEANTIQUE/turquie/didymes/didymes1.htm for 
instance.

However, I am not really trying to reproduce something photo realistic, but 
to make an evocation of some ancient place. Tings should be properly 
balanced one way or another and that needs some further tweaking.

Thomas


Post a reply to this message

From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Ruined Place - WIP 3b
Date: 15 Feb 2008 07:35:07
Message: <47b586fb@news.povray.org>
A further balancing of texture parameters. Coarser stones, more random 
lichen. Stone textures could be lighter though, although this depends on the 
source material and even black pillars could be envisioned here.

Thomas


Post a reply to this message


Attachments:
Download 'IonianTempleRuins_2_05.png' (475 KB)

Preview of image 'IonianTempleRuins_2_05.png'
IonianTempleRuins_2_05.png


 

From: nemesis
Subject: Re: Ruined Place - WIP 3
Date: 15 Feb 2008 08:02:29
Message: <47b58d65$1@news.povray.org>
Thomas de Groot wrote:
> well, the radiosity used is mainly default and it may enhance artifacts 
> here. Maybe that is the reason.

hmm, I didn't notice it was used.  If it's the default, then it is 
already very smooth and very slight, I don't think it's causing 
artifacts.  Is ambient 0 for all objects other than sky?  The shadow 
areas are too flat, there should be some occlusion effect along edges 
and groves...

I really think the texture makes it all look too grainy.  Perhaps some 
slight camera blur in the distance would make some of it go away?


Post a reply to this message

From: nemesis
Subject: Re: Ruined Place - WIP 3
Date: 15 Feb 2008 08:22:30
Message: <47b59216$1@news.povray.org>
you know, from those photos, I think the problem is partially that 
povray doesn't support mip-mapping of textures and anisotropic 
filtering.  I don't know how these could support procedural textures, 
but they'd certainly help in making the graininess go away.

Only geometry near the camera would show the little pointy granite 
grain.  Those far away would only permit the larger crackle pattern to 
be visible.  Besides, the ground would show a smooth transition from 
detail up close and be slightly blurred and less grainy in the distance.

I still think, though, that camera blur would be of some help here.


Post a reply to this message

From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Ruined Place - WIP 3
Date: 15 Feb 2008 08:40:22
Message: <47b59646$1@news.povray.org>
"nemesis" <nam### [at] nospamgmailcom> schreef in bericht 
news:47b58d65$1@news.povray.org...
>
> hmm, I didn't notice it was used.  If it's the default, then it is already 
> very smooth and very slight, I don't think it's causing artifacts.  Is 
> ambient 0 for all objects other than sky?  The shadow areas are too flat, 
> there should be some occlusion effect along edges and groves...

Ambient 0 for objects is standard in all my scenes.

>
> I really think the texture makes it all look too grainy.  Perhaps some 
> slight camera blur in the distance would make some of it go away?

Interestingly, what makes the graininess go away is to put the sun behind 
the camera :-)  The more dramatic lighting effect is thereby lost somewhat 
of course, but the stone shows off better. I shall upload an example as soon 
as the render is done.

Thomas


Post a reply to this message

From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Ruined Place - WIP 3
Date: 15 Feb 2008 08:45:06
Message: <47b59762$1@news.povray.org>
"nemesis" <nam### [at] nospamgmailcom> schreef in bericht 
news:47b59216$1@news.povray.org...
> you know, from those photos, I think the problem is partially that povray 
> doesn't support mip-mapping of textures and anisotropic filtering.  I 
> don't know how these could support procedural textures, but they'd 
> certainly help in making the graininess go away.
>
> Only geometry near the camera would show the little pointy granite grain. 
> Those far away would only permit the larger crackle pattern to be visible. 
> Besides, the ground would show a smooth transition from detail up close 
> and be slightly blurred and less grainy in the distance.
>
> I still think, though, that camera blur would be of some help here.

One thing about the photographs is also that those classic ruins we visit 
may often have been "cleaned" of all offensive lichens and growths that 
threaten their survival.

You might well be right about mip-mapping here... My knowledge about that is 
slight however.

Thomas


Post a reply to this message

From: nemesis
Subject: Re: Ruined Place - WIP 3
Date: 15 Feb 2008 08:57:44
Message: <47b59a58$1@news.povray.org>
Thomas de Groot wrote:
> You might well be right about mip-mapping here... My knowledge about that is 
> slight however.

it's just a technique for substituting less detailed textures for richer 
textures the closer something is to the camera.  First time I saw it in 
full glory was in the N64 game Goldeneye.  From the distance, walls 
looked detailed enough, but once you came near them, *real* detail began 
to smoothly blend in to the larger granite texture, like tiny crackles 
and ridges... that was amazing for the time...


Post a reply to this message

From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Ruined Place - WIP 3
Date: 15 Feb 2008 09:42:51
Message: <47b5a4eb@news.povray.org>
Allright. Last example for the time being, showing the place under a 
different lighting. Note that the graininess is much less.

Thomas


Post a reply to this message


Attachments:
Download 'IonianTempleRuins_2.png' (510 KB)

Preview of image 'IonianTempleRuins_2.png'
IonianTempleRuins_2.png


 

<<< Previous 10 Messages Goto Latest 10 Messages Next 10 Messages >>>

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.