 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Originally intended for the latest TC-RTC Challenge, this version did not
make it. Still, I suppose you will appreciate it here :-)
Architecture inspired by another vision of Etienne-Louis Boullée, his
concept of "buried architecture" (architecture ensevelie). I made several
uses of Edouard Poor's proximity macro in this scene. Most difficult for
geometrical architectural forms, but easier for free forms like the statue.
--
All the best,
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'boullee_architectureensevelie_var1_02.jpg' (195 KB)
Preview of image 'boullee_architectureensevelie_var1_02.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nice.
I like especially the swamp and the trees.
;-)
Paolo
>Thomas de Groot on date 08/10/2009 16:25 wrote:
> Originally intended for the latest TC-RTC Challenge, this version did not
> make it. Still, I suppose you will appreciate it here :-)
>
> Architecture inspired by another vision of Etienne-Louis Boullée, his
> concept of "buried architecture" (architecture ensevelie). I made several
> uses of Edouard Poor's proximity macro in this scene. Most difficult for
> geometrical architectural forms, but easier for free forms like the statue.
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Originally intended for the latest TC-RTC Challenge, this version did n
ot
> make it. Still, I suppose you will appreciate it here :-)
>
> Architecture inspired by another vision of Etienne-Louis Boullée, his
> concept of "buried architecture" (architecture ensevelie). I made sever
al
> uses of Edouard Poor's proximity macro in this scene. Most difficult fo
r
> geometrical architectural forms, but easier for free forms like the sta
tue.
>
Is that Cathy running in the park? Nice atmosphere.
Jerome
--
mailto:jeb### [at] free fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeb### [at] jabberfr
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (1 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Very nice scene. The architecture just fits the mood.
though I have to say I don't quite see the effect of the proximity macro...
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 16:25:09 +0200, "Thomas de Groot"
<tDOTdegroot@interDOTnlANOTHERDOTnet> wrote:
>Originally intended for the latest TC-RTC Challenge, this version did not
>make it. Still, I suppose you will appreciate it here :-)
Looks like a winner to me ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Really nice one.
Too much ambient though, especially on the building. Better use radiosity...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Oct 2009 22:19:36 +0200, clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>Really nice one.
>
>Too much ambient though, especially on the building. Better use radiosity...
Thomas's images are always too light (for me). Reduce the Gamma to get a better
view.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"clipka" <ano### [at] anonymousorg> schreef in bericht
news:4ace4958@news.povray.org...
> Really nice one.
>
> Too much ambient though, especially on the building. Better use
> radiosity...
Ambient? No ambient. Only radiosity and some fog. Display gamma at 2.2. no
assumed gamma. rendered in 3.7
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
""Jérôme M. Berger"" <jeb### [at] freefr> schreef in bericht
news:4ace1d66$1@news.povray.org...
Yes, that is Cathy. A pose I have used a couple of times in the past.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Paolo Gibellini" <p.g### [at] gmailcom> schreef in bericht
news:4ace0529$1@news.povray.org...
> Nice.
> I like especially the swamp and the trees.
> ;-)
Thank you Paolo.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"nemesis" <nam### [at] gmailcom> schreef in bericht
news:4ace301a@news.povray.org...
> Very nice scene. The architecture just fits the mood.
>
> though I have to say I don't quite see the effect of the proximity
> macro...
>
Thanks. The proximity on the building is very subtle but still there. I
found out that on these kind of objects, it is rather difficult to find a
satisfying range. It is much easier with irregular objects like the statue.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> schreef in bericht
news:u4fsc59i4rib7ljln0fe2nl2il9g1m16o4@4ax.com...
>
> Looks like a winner to me ;)
>
Hehe. That will depend on what is still to come... :-)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thomas de Groot" <tDOTdegroot@interDOTnlANOTHERDOTnet> wrote:
> Originally intended for the latest TC-RTC Challenge, this version did not
> make it. Still, I suppose you will appreciate it here :-)
>
> Architecture inspired by another vision of Etienne-Louis Boullée, his
> concept of "buried architecture" (architecture ensevelie). I made several
> uses of Edouard Poor's proximity macro in this scene. Most difficult for
> geometrical architectural forms, but easier for free forms like the statue.
>
> --
> All the best,
>
> Thomas
It seems a partial portrait of an ideal world.
I wish could live inside.
:-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Really nice one :-)
Thomas de Groot a écrit :
> Originally intended for the latest TC-RTC Challenge, this version did not
> make it. Still, I suppose you will appreciate it here :-)
>
> Architecture inspired by another vision of Etienne-Louis Boullée, his
> concept of "buried architecture" (architecture ensevelie). I made several
> uses of Edouard Poor's proximity macro in this scene. Most difficult for
> geometrical architectural forms, but easier for free forms like the statue.
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thomas de Groot" <tDOTdegroot@interDOTnlANOTHERDOTnet> wrote in message
news:4acdf64c@news.povray.org...
> Originally intended for the latest TC-RTC Challenge, this version did not
> make it. Still, I suppose you will appreciate it here :-)
Yes ... very nice. I've learned alot about depth queue's from your work. I
like how the sidewalk pulls the viewer into the scene!
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Christian Froeschlin
Subject: Re: Another Boullée_architecture
Date: 9 Oct 2009 06:47:04
Message: <4acf14a8@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Ambient? No ambient. Only radiosity and some fog. Display gamma at 2.2. no
> assumed gamma. rendered in 3.7
Hmm it looks bright to be too. Funny thing is it seems to look
better to me when applying the inverse gamma correction of 0.45,
so I wonder if there is any way the correction is applied twice.
As far as I understand it, jpeg does not support gamma information
and contains the gamma corrected RGB values for your display gamma.
Can you post the unprocessed png output from POV for comparison?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christian Froeschlin <chr### [at] chrfrde> wrote:
> Thomas de Groot wrote:
>
> > Ambient? No ambient. Only radiosity and some fog. Display gamma at 2.2. no
> > assumed gamma. rendered in 3.7
>
> Hmm it looks bright to be too. Funny thing is it seems to look
> better to me when applying the inverse gamma correction of 0.45,
> so I wonder if there is any way the correction is applied twice.
I too have noticed this about your images, Thomas. I have come to think of it as
an aspect of your image style, your POV 'personality' as it were!
It usually looks as if your fog distance is a little small. However, juggling
fog distance to minimise washout and get the best depth cues (and/or sky
gradient) is not easy. I've got it wrong before - in an effort to get a hazy
atmosphere I think I overly washed out my chess-based RTC image from a while
back. (My main problem is that my laptop screen is damaged, so brightness is
uneven across its surface, and, coupled with the usual viewing-angle variations,
makes it difficult for me to judge image brightness.)
Bill
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Christian Froeschlin" <chr### [at] chrfrde> schreef in bericht
news:4acf14a8@news.povray.org...
> Thomas de Groot wrote:
>
>> Ambient? No ambient. Only radiosity and some fog. Display gamma at 2.2.
>> no assumed gamma. rendered in 3.7
>
> Hmm it looks bright to be too. Funny thing is it seems to look
> better to me when applying the inverse gamma correction of 0.45,
> so I wonder if there is any way the correction is applied twice.
>
> As far as I understand it, jpeg does not support gamma information
> and contains the gamma corrected RGB values for your display gamma.
> Can you post the unprocessed png output from POV for comparison?
The png would be too large (>1 Mb) to post here.
What I wonder about: How do you see the immediate foreground? Too bright?
Normal? Because it may just be my fog used that is the cause.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Another =3D?ISO-8859-1?Q?Boull=3DE9e_architecture?=3D
Date: 9 Oct 2009 07:37:06
Message: <4acf2062$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht
news:web.4acf17e085ed91266dd25f0b0@news.povray.org...
>
> I too have noticed this about your images, Thomas. I have come to think of
> it as
> an aspect of your image style, your POV 'personality' as it were!
>
> It usually looks as if your fog distance is a little small. However,
> juggling
> fog distance to minimise washout and get the best depth cues (and/or sky
> gradient) is not easy. I've got it wrong before - in an effort to get a
> hazy
> atmosphere I think I overly washed out my chess-based RTC image from a
> while
> back. (My main problem is that my laptop screen is damaged, so brightness
> is
> uneven across its surface, and, coupled with the usual viewing-angle
> variations,
> makes it difficult for me to judge image brightness.)
>
The fog distance may certainly be a bit too small, especially when looking
at the inside of the building. However, I do not feel that as a problem and
rather welcome the wash out there, so maybe this is about differences of
perception between observers :-)
My principal test when considering fog is how crisp the foreground is
compared to the background or the middle ground. I must admit too that media
works better than fog of course, but I do not always opt for that solution.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Christian Froeschlin" <chr### [at] chrfrde> schreef in bericht
news:4acf14a8@news.povray.org...
> Can you post the unprocessed png output from POV for comparison?
I post here a cropped part of the image.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'boullee_architectureensevelie_var1_02_croped.png' (949 KB)
Preview of image 'boullee_architectureensevelie_var1_02_croped.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht
news:4acf144f$1@news.povray.org...
>
> Yes ... very nice. I've learned alot about depth queue's from your work. I
> like how the sidewalk pulls the viewer into the scene!
Thank you Jim. Yes, depth queue's can be subtly used in landscape scenes and
I generally try to add one or two. The (contentious) fog here is another
one, but visibly not to everybody's liking... ;-)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Carlo C." <nomail@nomail> schreef in bericht
news:web.4aceed4c997c38cf8e9437090@news.povray.org...
> It seems a partial portrait of an ideal world.
> I wish could live inside.
> :-)
>
Well, I am not sure about that personally. My series of Cathy's World, of
which this is one, contains some more disturbing views...
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"LightBeam" <seb### [at] gmailcom> schreef in bericht
news:4acef047$1@news.povray.org...
> Really nice one :-)
Thank you :-)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot a écrit :
> "Christian Froeschlin" <chr### [at] chrfrde> schreef in bericht
> news:4acf14a8@news.povray.org...
>> Can you post the unprocessed png output from POV for comparison?
> I post here a cropped part of the image.
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
Your fog make it look like the interior is glowing.
Maybe use a darker shade for your fog. Now, it looks like you are using
a white/light gray or bluish fog. You may try with a dark gray, maybe
tinted with some blue.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Christian Froeschlin
Subject: Re: Another Boullée_architecture
Date: 9 Oct 2009 19:08:50
Message: <4acfc282@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot wrote:
> The png would be too large (>1 Mb) to post here.
but now that it's here anyway it looks the same so probably
not a gamma issue but a fog issue ;)
> What I wonder about: How do you see the immediate foreground? Too bright?
> Normal? Because it may just be my fog used that is the cause.
Yes, the problem seems to be only in the background. It's rather
striking with the dominant cavity behind the statue which you would
expect to be rather dark (and even when illuminated, you'd expect
to see the inner edges). This looks similar to the walls being
in shadow but having high ambient, which is probably what
clipka was referring to.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot schrieb:
>> Too much ambient though, especially on the building. Better use
>> radiosity...
>
> Ambient? No ambient. Only radiosity and some fog. Display gamma at 2.2. no
> assumed gamma. rendered in 3.7
Radiosity recursion level?
Something's wrong about it at any rate.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Christian Froeschlin" <chr### [at] chrfrde> schreef in bericht
news:4acfc282@news.povray.org...
>> but now that it's here anyway it looks the same so probably
> not a gamma issue but a fog issue ;)
Right! :-)
> Yes, the problem seems to be only in the background. It's rather
> striking with the dominant cavity behind the statue which you would
> expect to be rather dark (and even when illuminated, you'd expect
> to see the inner edges). This looks similar to the walls being
> in shadow but having high ambient, which is probably what
> clipka was referring to.
Yes. Having been lazy, I have kept the fog instead of switching to media as
I should have done, knowing that fog does not react with light, especially
in shadowy parts. I shall probably make another render implementing that. At
first sight, I am not too much troubled by this but it should be done in the
end.
Thanks for commenting, Christian!
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Alain" <aze### [at] qwertyorg> schreef in bericht
news:4acf4aa4$1@news.povray.org...
> Your fog make it look like the interior is glowing.
>
> Maybe use a darker shade for your fog. Now, it looks like you are using a
> white/light gray or bluish fog. You may try with a dark gray, maybe tinted
> with some blue.
>
Yes indeed. As I answered to Christian, I should have replaced the fog by a
media but laziness took the upper hand at the end of the day... :-)
It will be done in time though.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"clipka" <ano### [at] anonymousorg> schreef in bericht
news:4ad02cfb$1@news.povray.org...
>
> Radiosity recursion level?
>
> Something's wrong about it at any rate.
Recursion_limit is set to 1 here. I don't believe it needs a higher level.
No, the whole issue is about fog, especially as it does not react with light
in the shadowy parts of the building. In time, I shall replace it with an
appropriate media.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot schrieb:
> Recursion_limit is set to 1 here. I don't believe it needs a higher level.
> No, the whole issue is about fog, especially as it does not react with light
> in the shadowy parts of the building. In time, I shall replace it with an
> appropriate media.
Yes, I guess fog fits the bill of what I see.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 9 Oct 2009 09:07:51 +0200, "Thomas de Groot"
<tDOTdegroot@interDOTnlANOTHERDOTnet> wrote:
>
>"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> schreef in bericht
>news:u4fsc59i4rib7ljln0fe2nl2il9g1m16o4@4ax.com...
>>
>> Looks like a winner to me ;)
>>
>
>Hehe. That will depend on what is still to come... :-)
>
True at least you've no competition from me (as if … :-)
It is about time some others entered the animation challenge.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"clipka" <ano### [at] anonymousorg> schreef in bericht
news:4ad051e4$1@news.povray.org...
> Thomas de Groot schrieb:
>
>> Recursion_limit is set to 1 here. I don't believe it needs a higher
>> level. No, the whole issue is about fog, especially as it does not react
>> with light in the shadowy parts of the building. In time, I shall replace
>> it with an appropriate media.
>
> Yes, I guess fog fits the bill of what I see.
Otoh, I think you are also right in that the recursion_limit should indeed
be set at least at 2 for more resolution in the building's shadow.
Thomas.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot a écrit :
> "Alain" <aze### [at] qwertyorg> schreef in bericht
> news:4acf4aa4$1@news.povray.org...
>> Your fog make it look like the interior is glowing.
>>
>> Maybe use a darker shade for your fog. Now, it looks like you are using a
>> white/light gray or bluish fog. You may try with a dark gray, maybe tinted
>> with some blue.
>>
> Yes indeed. As I answered to Christian, I should have replaced the fog by a
> media but laziness took the upper hand at the end of the day... :-)
> It will be done in time though.
>
> Thomas
>
>
Fog is ok for test renders and works in progress. It renders faster than
media.
But, yes, do use media for the close-to final renders.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
