 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"stbenge" <^@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:49d00e5a@news.povray.org...
> Hello everyone,
>
> Here is a cellular automata simulation I created in POV. It's a very
> common version that you see everywhere, but I thought it would look nice
> as a shell. I wasn't striving for realism, though to figure out a way to
> make an actual shell would be nice :)
>
> The CA sim is a long strip. An array was used to store two levels of
> cell history. The spheres comprising the shell hold the entire history
> of the sim.
>
> Questions and comments are welcome, as always~
>
> Sam
Thats pretty hardcore man!
That would make a nice v3.7 sample scene...imo...
ian
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Friggin' jawdropping awesome as usual. I also enjoy the soft lighting very much
in this one.
I won't even ask the mindblowing details even though it's probably just a couple
of meta-recursive functions in the hyperquadric domain. It's sunday.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Just wow.
Do I understand correctly that the shell shape itself
is not related to the CA simulation, i.e. no 3D growth?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
[GDS|Entropy] wrote:
> Thats pretty hardcore man!
>
> That would make a nice v3.7 sample scene...imo...
Thanks Ian!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Friggin' jawdropping awesome as usual. I also enjoy the soft lighting very much
> in this one.
thanks :)
> I won't even ask the mindblowing details even though it's probably just a couple
> of meta-recursive functions in the hyperquadric domain. It's sunday.
It's actually not that bad.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christian Froeschlin wrote:
> Just wow.
>
> Do I understand correctly that the shell shape itself
> is not related to the CA simulation, i.e. no 3D growth?
Right Christian. The shell's shape is independent from the CA sim. I
could have displaced the spheres according to the CA data, but that
would have involved compensating for the holes caused by the
displacement. Details would have been lost.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stbenge <^@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Questions and comments are welcome, as always~
My, that's purdie!
Tried this as a blob?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"[GDS|Entropy]" <gds-entropy AT hotmail DOT com> wrote:
> Thats pretty hardcore man!
Is that "pretty hardcore, man!", or "pretty, hardcore man!"? ;)
Well, true enough either way...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> stbenge <^@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Questions and comments are welcome, as always~
>
> My, that's purdie!
>
> Tried this as a blob?
Thanks.
Sure, I thought about it. I don't like to think of what the render time
would be though. I might give it a shot, for another object perhaps.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
[speechless]
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
