> - The scene is too dark.

Definitely the biggest issue. Working with media/light interaction in 
POV-Ray can be slow, so I suggest you forget it for now and work on your 
lighting. Once it looks cool without fog, you can consider adding some in. 
Illuminate the objects of interest and get some contrast in there.

 - Slime
 [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]

Post a reply to this message

"Slime" <fak### [at] emailaddress> schreef in bericht 
news:49b0c7fc$1@news.povray.org...
>> - The scene is too dark.
>
> Definitely the biggest issue. Working with media/light interaction in 
> POV-Ray can be slow, so I suggest you forget it for now and work on your 
> lighting. Once it looks cool without fog, you can consider adding some in. 
> Illuminate the objects of interest and get some contrast in there.
>

No. I am sorry. I am about 99% certain that the gamma's are correct and I 
can clearly see everything (no ambient used of course) and as far as I can 
see the contrast between light and dark is about right.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"clipka" <nomail@nomail> schreef in bericht 
news:web.49afee19df6b06f2f567c3de0@news.povray.org...
>
> Hum... I guess it's really time for you to go on a vacation someplace 
> sunny :P

<grin> Still have to do something with my subconscious.... :-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Cousin Ricky" <ric### [at] yahoocom> schreef in bericht 
news:web.49b0337cdf6b06f285de7b680@news.povray.org...
>
> Some points:
>
> - The scene is too dark.  I had to lower my monitor gamma to see the girls 
> as
> more than just vague blobs.  I can't even see the leftmost wolf at my 
> usual
> setting; it just poofed out of the blackness when I adjusted the monitor.
> (Note:  I try to set my monitor to 2.2, but with a viewing-angle-dependent 
> LCD
> with a wayward white point, I may be off.)

Well, I am pretty sure about my own gammas, so I don't know what I could do 
about that.

>
> - The street light looks_likes are too dim.  They should be considerably
> brighter than what they're illuminating.

Yes. I can increase the ambient used for simulating the bulb 'flare'. I 
based this however on a street light close to my house.

>
> - With that style of bulb enclosure (called a sag-lens), you won't get 
> much of a
> light cone--at least not in real life.  Sag-lenses will give you a "dark 
> cone"
> pointing upward, with a lot of light everywhere else.  Full cut-off 
> lenses,
> flush with the fixture, will get you your light cone, along with the 
> grateful
> appreciation of the neighborhood amateur astronomers.

Yes, I know. Tried it. Was not happy about the result. So, I just prefer 
this, which is not real world simulation, but that is not my purpose anyway.

>
> - The girls appear to be on the defensive.  They need to assert their 
> alpha
> dominance, or the wolves will not treat them very hospitably.  Remember, 
> Homo
> sapiens rules!  (Of course, the times I was chased or attacked by 
> domesticated
> wolves I was too scared to remember anything other than RUN!, which is the
> worst thing you can do when being chased or attacked by domesticated 
> wolves.)
> (Note: do not try this with bears or big cats.)

He he! Yes, absolutely true. I am afraid, the girsl have to learn that 
lesson. However, be sure that in my view, they will not be eaten. Otherwise, 
I would not have any other scenes to do with them. :-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht 
news:web.49afe5e8df6b06f26dd25f0b0@news.povray.org...
> "Thomas de Groot" <tDOTdegroot@interDOTnlANOTHERDOTnet> wrote:
>> - The buildings have been created using Sam Benge's Simulated Technology
>> macro. The resulting isosurfaces were transformed into meshes with Bill
>> Pragnell's Mesh Approximator.
>
> Haha, I'd forgotten I even posted that - it was a wip halfway to the 
> meshrelief
> macros! You are obviously a compulsive hoarder of macros... (it's good 
> that
> somebody is - there must be so much code posted here that never gets 
> polished
> enough to make it to the object collection, etc)

Now that you mention this: I wonder what happened to my copy of the 
meshrelief macros then? I seem to have mixed things up there. Strange... I 
shall have a look. I was certain that I used the latest version...

>
> The wolves look quite large, is that deliberate? There's something about 
> the
> clouds that doesn't look quite right too, I think they need a little 
> noise.
> Otherwise, this looks very good. I like the ground texture!

I used the size from Poser, in comparison to the Poser characters, which is 
in balance. Remember however that the girls are not adult size.
Yes the clouds are rather basic and I may work a bit more on them. I shall 
see.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"[GDS|Entropy]" <gds### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht 
news:49afdb91$1@news.povray.org...
> This looks to be going somewhere cool, I like the hellhound look of the 
> wolves too. :-D
>

Thanks! Yes, the initial idea comes out quite well I believe. A bit more 
work and I shall be satisfied. It does not have to be perfect. I am always 
more interested in working out a concept than in perfecting real world 
looks.

I like the wolves too! The glint in the eyes does a lot although it was 
rather difficult to get it about right.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

message de news: 49b3bc44@news.povray.org...
>
> "Slime" <fak### [at] emailaddress> schreef in bericht 
> news:49b0c7fc$1@news.povray.org...
>>> - The scene is too dark.
>>
>> Definitely the biggest issue. Working with media/light interaction in 
>> POV-Ray can be slow, so I suggest you forget it for now and work on your 
>> lighting. Once it looks cool without fog, you can consider adding some 
>> in. Illuminate the objects of interest and get some contrast in there.
>>
>
> No. I am sorry. I am about 99% certain that the gamma's are correct and I 
> can clearly see everything (no ambient used of course) and as far as I can 
> see the contrast between light and dark is about right.
>
> Thomas
>

I can clearly see everything too, my contrast and brightness are properly 
set and my monitor gamma is 1.8 .
Of course the image is rather dark but that's what I would expect expect for 
a night scene...

I agree anyway that the light bulbs should look brighter IMHO.

Xavier

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas de Groot" <tDOTdegroot@interDOTnlANOTHERDOTnet> wrote:
> No. I am sorry. I am about 99% certain that the gamma's are correct and I
> can clearly see everything (no ambient used of course) and as far as I can
> see the contrast between light and dark is about right.

As a matter of fact, your shot *is* problematic on poorly calibrated displays,
or monitors calibrated for different viewing conditions (e.g. if someone
calibrated his display for dim artificial illumination, they'll have trouble
seeing your picture with bright daylight shining into their room).

On my primary display and under my standard viewing conditions, The shot turns
out fine, e.g. I can make out the structure of the buildings and such (which
supports your claim, as I am quite sure that the display is rather well
calibrated, too); on my secondary display, however, I cannot. (So far it has
defeated any attempts to calibrate it properly, so I make the best of it and
use it to assess how my shots look like to viewers who don't bother about
calibration.)

Just in case this shot should happen to be a WIP for some kind of competition
(*wink*), you might want to take such issues into account. It *may* be better
to have the shot a bit too bright than a bit too dark.

Post a reply to this message

"clipka" <nomail@nomail> schreef in bericht 
news:web.49b3f9fcdf6b06f2a745f7570@news.povray.org...
> As a matter of fact, your shot *is* problematic on poorly calibrated 
> displays,
> or monitors calibrated for different viewing conditions (e.g. if someone
> calibrated his display for dim artificial illumination, they'll have 
> trouble
> seeing your picture with bright daylight shining into their room).
>
> On my primary display and under my standard viewing conditions, The shot 
> turns
> out fine, e.g. I can make out the structure of the buildings and such 
> (which
> supports your claim, as I am quite sure that the display is rather well
> calibrated, too); on my secondary display, however, I cannot. (So far it 
> has
> defeated any attempts to calibrate it properly, so I make the best of it 
> and
> use it to assess how my shots look like to viewers who don't bother about
> calibration.)
>
> Just in case this shot should happen to be a WIP for some kind of 
> competition
> (*wink*), you might want to take such issues into account. It *may* be 
> better
> to have the shot a bit too bright than a bit too dark.

No, This is not intended for the competition you are thinking of :-) It is 
an independant work. I feel that it is not entirely covered by the topic and 
I like to work in different directions at the same time.

I am aware indeed of the problems with displays you refer to above, however, 
for this particular night scene (and night scenes are always difficult) I 
strongly feel against brightening it up as that would destroy the overall 
ambience I am trying to show.That is why I opted for more restricted 
spotlights instead of the global lights you would expect in regular street 
lamps. The effect was certainly more correct, but it did not really suit my 
concept of the scene.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Xavier Manget" <NOS### [at] NOSPAMfreefr> schreef in bericht 
news:49b3e87f$1@news.povray.org...
>
>
> I can clearly see everything too, my contrast and brightness are properly 
> set and my monitor gamma is 1.8 .
> Of course the image is rather dark but that's what I would expect expect 
> for a night scene...

Clipka explains the problem well, below. The darkness of the scene on the 
other hand is intended of course. Not everything should be seen clearly.

>
> I agree anyway that the light bulbs should look brighter IMHO.

Correct. I did feel also that the bulbs could use a boost, and even a glow, 
now that I think about it.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message