 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann
Subject: Re: Amalthea, now with brightness 1 and assumed_gamma 1.5
Date: 9 May 2009 20:48:17
Message: <4a062451$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
High!
clipka wrote:
> (a) an optical illusion? (maybe you have the pole's co-ordinate wrong and drawn
> inward, giving you "only" a shadowed dent)
Almost certainly not - I tried the north pole close-up view with an
additional light source directly overhead, and the black hole remained!
> (b) a scale or precision related issue?
I wouldn't rule out this... at the moment, I try a scaling divisor of 1
(!), strangely, radiosity gets extremely slow now!
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg_=27Yadgar=27_Bleimann?= <yaz### [at] gmx de> wrote:
> No, it isn't... I found out that when I change the divisor in the vertex
> definition section from 400 to 398, the north polar gap disappears! So
> the result might not be entirely "geographically" accurate, but
> esthetically satisfying...
>
> But I still doubt whether sticking to this kind of work methods will
> ever make me a commercially successful programmer... I'm more like a
> shaggy drop-out log cabin tinkerer than a sophisticated computer scientist!
Indeed - if I'd implement bugfixes to our commercial products in a similar
fashion, my boss would probably rip off my head in no time flat :P
"I don't know why, but it seems to work now"... uh-oh! Experience teaches that
this means more trouble is heading our way some day later >_<
> By the way, when using radiosity the strangely "glowing" portions near
> Amalthea's north pole continue to exist - so it probably is a matter of
> radiosity rather than mesh geometry!
What's your recursion_limit setting?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg_=27Yadgar=27_Bleimann?= <yaz### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> > (a) an optical illusion? (maybe you have the pole's co-ordinate wrong and drawn
> > inward, giving you "only" a shadowed dent)
>
> Almost certainly not - I tried the north pole close-up view with an
> additional light source directly overhead, and the black hole remained!
In that case, if was really a hole, shouldn't you have seen the south pole
through it from inside?
> > (b) a scale or precision related issue?
>
> I wouldn't rule out this... at the moment, I try a scaling divisor of 1
> (!), strangely, radiosity gets extremely slow now!
Sounds like an effect on the octree.
What (absolute) co-ordinate range are we talking about at this divisor?
Note that for best radiosity performance, the visible scene should be close to
<0,0,0>, and absolute sizes not *too* exotic.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann
Subject: Re: Amalthea, now with brightness 1 and assumed_gamma 1.5
Date: 9 May 2009 21:13:31
Message: <4a062a3b$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
High!
clipka wrote:
> What's your recursion_limit setting?
Default... I also noticed that the glowing portions disappear when
setting the scaling divisor to 1! Perhaps I'll also try another
recursion_limit at sc=13347... and then once again also the mesh
geometry thing!
(half an hour later... and at 03:12 CET(DS), I'm getting tired...
yaaaaaawn!)
No, recursion_limit does not influence the glowing parts!
See you in Khyberspace!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann
Subject: Re: Amalthea, now with brightness 1 and assumed_gamma 1.5
Date: 9 May 2009 21:34:18
Message: <4a062f1a$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
High!
clipka wrote:
> What (absolute) co-ordinate range are we talking about at this divisor?
As Amalthea is a moon of Jupiter, with the Sun at the origin, the whole
thing is situated 778,000,000 units from the origin!
> Note that for best radiosity performance, the visible scene should be close to
> <0,0,0>, and absolute sizes not *too* exotic.
Then probably radiosity won't really work with a Solar System model...
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg_=27Yadgar=27_Bleimann?= <yaz### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> Then probably radiosity won't really work with a Solar System model...
It should, provided that you make sure that whatever planet is currently in view
is near the co-ordinate origin.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Sven Littkowski
Subject: Re: Amalthea, now with brightness 1 and assumed_gamma 1.5
Date: 11 May 2009 14:42:42
Message: <4a0871a2$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Something's still not right. Shadows too sharp? Surface too smooth? Texture
too basic?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann
Subject: Re: Amalthea, now with brightness 1 and assumed_gamma 1.5
Date: 12 May 2009 06:58:37
Message: <4a09565d$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
High!
Sven Littkowski wrote:
> Something's still not right. Shadows too sharp? Surface too smooth? Texture
> too basic?
Yes, the texture is only provisional... later on, I will add some
small-scale normal bumps, also a more differenced pigment - Amalthea's
leading side is 1.3 times brighter than the trailing side, also the
slopes of a large crater near the south pole are substantially brighter,
while other crater slopes show patches of greenish soil.
But currently, I'm just working on the very first pass of PoVSolar (call
it version 0.1), after having finished all bodies of the Jovian system
(63 moons!), I'll turn for some weeks to my other project, the Personal
Cabin Railroad System, then onward to Flags.inc, finally back to
PoVSolar - Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and some of the larger Kuiper and
Inner Belt asteroids!
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Now playing: So gut wie du (Inga Rumpf)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Alain
Subject: Re: Amalthea, now with brightness 1 and assumed_gamma 1.5
Date: 12 May 2009 20:28:54
Message: <4a0a1446$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann nous illumina en ce 2009-05-09 21:34 -->
> High!
>
> clipka wrote:
>
>> What (absolute) co-ordinate range are we talking about at this divisor?
>
> As Amalthea is a moon of Jupiter, with the Sun at the origin, the whole
> thing is situated 778,000,000 units from the origin!
>
>> Note that for best radiosity performance, the visible scene should be
>> close to
>> <0,0,0>, and absolute sizes not *too* exotic.
>
> Then probably radiosity won't really work with a Solar System model...
>
> See you in Khyberspace!
>
> Yadgar
Try translating your model so that the closest planet sits at the origin.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
