"clipka" <ano### [at] anonymousorg> schreef in bericht 
news:4abe30c1@news.povray.org...
> Moving parts of "Southern" valve gear in (not yet full) textured glory.
> (33 minutes rendering time on an i7 920, 2.67 GHz)
>
> Definitely not dirty enough. A good use case for some proximity pattern
> I guess.
>
> The joints all need some more details, too, but I'll leave that for later.
>

By Odin's blind eye! This is superb!

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot schrieb:

> By Odin's blind eye! This is superb!

The trouble is: It's only half as superb as I would like it to be :-P

(Boy, being a perfectionist can be hard at times...)

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 10:12:05 +0200, clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:

>
>I've come across quite a few websites of (or about) such people during 
>my researches - from the HO scale enthusiast "customizing" mass product 
>models  for the perfectly realistic look, to people working on "1:1 
>scale models", i.e. restoring actual steam locomotives.
>

There seems to be a lot of them about ;)

>Yeah, I guess that's what I'm doing - except that I'm keeping it virtual.
>

Yeah! None of this "dirty hands" thing :)

>(The thing I'm dreaming of is to one day build a, say, 1:16 scale model 
>of the Apollo lunar lander. For real, not just as a CG model.)
>

Keep in touch :)

>> Keep it up.
>
>I'll do my best :-)

I am sure.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

clipka wrote:
> Another fight won. This train is going somewhere, but I tell you - 
> complex cast-iron parts like that cylinder block are no fun to model in 
> CSG when you want proper beveling...
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 


Either you're nuts, computers have advanced even more than I think since 
I bought mine, or (most likely) both.

The "steam" is very solid. Looking forward to checking out the "punk."

Bit of a shame you'll take this nice model and spoil it with realism. 
Realism is a limitation which prevents us from seeing how nice the model 
is. I prefer the pink and green version.

JRG posted a transformer model some time ago; Might be some beveling 
solutions there if you want to see another's take on it.

  -Shay

Post a reply to this message

Shay schrieb:

> Either you're nuts, computers have advanced even more than I think since 
> I bought mine, or (most likely) both.

Yeah, I guess so :-)

I think 33 minutes isn't too bad for such a render; maybe it'll go up to 
1 hour when the geometry is finished, and maybe with all bells & 
whistles (by which in this case I mean texturing, special effects and 
lighting - the actual physical devices will be part of the geometry ;-)) 
I'll face a day of rendering time. I've seen worse :-)


> The "steam" is very solid. Looking forward to checking out the "punk."

Well, I'm sorry to disappoint you, but this is actually not intended for 
the IRTC, but the "Across the Plains" TINA-CHeP contest, so this is 
unlikely to become the stage for a punk rock band or something :-)

(Though I might change my mind in case I fail to finish in time for 
TINA-CHeP; I'm already thinking about ways to force the "time" and 
"punk" into the concept, as it would hurt tremendously to waste the 
opportunity.)


> Bit of a shame you'll take this nice model and spoil it with realism. 
> Realism is a limitation which prevents us from seeing how nice the model 
> is. I prefer the pink and green version.

Well, realism will spoil the opportunity to see all the /geometry/, but 
I do intend to invest some more time into texturing, too, in hope of 
making up for it.


> JRG posted a transformer model some time ago; Might be some beveling 
> solutions there if you want to see another's take on it.

Way too late to go for anything other than my own framework. No time to 
learn anything new on the remaining miles ahead. (And as you can see, my 
own beveling tools take me quite some distance already :-))

Post a reply to this message

More structural members added.

(Some of the rivets may appear to be "floating"; this is because they 
are: Still missing some pieces there.)

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'steam 2009-09-30 0451.jpg' (67 KB) Download 'steam 2009-09-30 0501.jpg' (98 KB)

Preview of image 'steam 2009-09-30 0451.jpg'

Preview of image 'steam 2009-09-30 0501.jpg'

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> More structural members added.
>
> (Some of the rivets may appear to be "floating"; this is because they
> are: Still missing some pieces there.)

This is spectacular stuff, I've been following with great interest. I hope you
finish it! You should definitely put some sort of image-series together on a
page somewhere showing the evolution of the model. I'd be as interested in that
as I would the final image(s).

Bill

Post a reply to this message

"clipka" <ano### [at] anonymousorg> schreef in bericht 
news:4ac2ca8d@news.povray.org...
> More structural members added.
>
> (Some of the rivets may appear to be "floating"; this is because they
> are: Still missing some pieces there.)
>
>

Flange on the foreground wheel missing.... :-)

I am nitpicking of course. Like Bill suggests, a series of progress images 
would be wonderfully instructive, after everything is finished. THis is a 
terrific project.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> More structural members added.
>
> (Some of the rivets may appear to be "floating"; this is because they
> are: Still missing some pieces there.)

O_O

a true craftsman...

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot schrieb:

> Flange on the foreground wheel missing.... :-)

Duh... should I have been /that/ blind?

No, but the /wheel/ is :-P

This is what in railway terms was called a "blind driver" - not an 
uncommon thing on the middle wheel set of steam locomotives with five 
driving axles, as with a long wheelbase the flanges became a problem in 
narrow curves. Even on locomotives with just 3 driving axles, it was not 
uncommon to reduce the track of the outer wheel sets for the same reason.

The conical shape of the tyres still contributed to guiding the train 
through curves, and the horizontally very rigid chassis made sure that 
the blind wheels could not slip off the track.

Other designs empolyed a mechanism that would shift the wheelsets 
horizontally against each other in curves, but it made the suspension 
and the drive rods a deal more complex.

Locomotives with more than 5 driving axles almost invariably had half of 
the driving wheels mounted on a bogey with separate cylinders (so-called 
"articulated" locomotives).

> I am nitpicking of course.

As you see, ATM it may be difficult to out-nitpick me about my own model :-P

Post a reply to this message