 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I thought it would be fun to see if I could get this little fellow to
look like my favorite treat. I think I'm headed in the right direction,
although I had a time finding an ior value for chocolate. The best I
could come up with was a discussion that offered a guess of low 2's (I
chose 2.2) ... the specular is not very saturated but the roughness has
a fair amount of bloom ... with a bit more lighting work I think it will
look fine.
I've also been working on a crinkled foil texture to wrap around an ovus
or two ... after all whats a chocolate bunny without a few chocolate
eggs to keep him company ... right!
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'treat.png' (184 KB)
Preview of image 'treat.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Holsenback <jho### [at] povray org> wrote:
> I thought it would be fun to see if I could get this little fellow to
> look like my favorite treat. I think I'm headed in the right direction,
> although I had a time finding an ior value for chocolate. The best I
> could come up with was a discussion that offered a guess of low 2's (I
> chose 2.2) ... the specular is not very saturated but the roughness has
> a fair amount of bloom ... with a bit more lighting work I think it will
> look fine.
>
> I've also been working on a crinkled foil texture to wrap around an ovus
> or two ... after all whats a chocolate bunny without a few chocolate
> eggs to keep him company ... right!
Uh-oh, looks like you're getting some mould on your chocolate!
-tgq
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Trevor G Quayle" <Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Jim Holsenback <jho### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
> > I thought it would be fun to see if I could get this little fellow to
> > look like my favorite treat. I think I'm headed in the right direction,
> > although I had a time finding an ior value for chocolate. The best I
> > could come up with was a discussion that offered a guess of low 2's (I
> > chose 2.2) ... the specular is not very saturated but the roughness has
> > a fair amount of bloom ... with a bit more lighting work I think it will
> > look fine.
> >
> > I've also been working on a crinkled foil texture to wrap around an ovus
> > or two ... after all whats a chocolate bunny without a few chocolate
> > eggs to keep him company ... right!
>
> Uh-oh, looks like you're getting some mould on your chocolate!
>
> -tgq
@Trevor: It /would/ be nice on a bronze bunny though :)
@Jim: Looking yummy; have you considered an Easter basket/grass for the shot
too?
-------------------------------------------------
www.McGregorFineArt.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/16/2011 04:56 PM, Robert McGregor wrote:
> "Trevor G Quayle"<Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> Jim Holsenback<jho### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
>>> I thought it would be fun to see if I could get this little fellow to
>>> look like my favorite treat. I think I'm headed in the right direction,
>>> although I had a time finding an ior value for chocolate. The best I
>>> could come up with was a discussion that offered a guess of low 2's (I
>>> chose 2.2) ... the specular is not very saturated but the roughness has
>>> a fair amount of bloom ... with a bit more lighting work I think it will
>>> look fine.
>>>
>>> I've also been working on a crinkled foil texture to wrap around an ovus
>>> or two ... after all whats a chocolate bunny without a few chocolate
>>> eggs to keep him company ... right!
>>
>> Uh-oh, looks like you're getting some mould on your chocolate!
>>
>> -tgq
It's not as pronounced when I disable sslt, and the other finish
attributes are pretty sparse, so I'm suspecting that lighting and or
viewing angle might need some minor adjustments ... the role of diffuse
seems a bit different with/without sslt as well.
> @Trevor: It /would/ be nice on a bronze bunny though :)
ha-ha ... it does resemble a bit of corrosion now that you mention it
> @Jim: Looking yummy; have you considered an Easter basket/grass for the shot
> too?
Given the timing (purely a coincidence btw) I could see how that might
be one option, but I think I'll opt for a less secular approach ... I
mean I get the symbolism of new, rebirth, eggs, chicks and bunnies ...
how the heck did chocolate worm it's way into the holiday. Bigger
business in chocolate -vs- eggs I suppose ... bloody capitalists ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht
news:4d8124a4$1@news.povray.org...
> ha-ha ... it does resemble a bit of corrosion now that you mention it
Last year's bunny? ;-)
Looking good. I feel my stomach rumble...
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 16.03.2011 19:45, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
> I thought it would be fun to see if I could get this little fellow to
> look like my favorite treat. I think I'm headed in the right direction,
> although I had a time finding an ior value for chocolate. The best I
> could come up with was a discussion that offered a guess of low 2's (I
> chose 2.2) ...
For anything organic, something around 1.3 (water) is a good first guess.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2011/03/16 14:45, Jim Holsenback a écrit :
> I thought it would be fun to see if I could get this little fellow to
> look like my favorite treat. I think I'm headed in the right direction,
> although I had a time finding an ior value for chocolate. The best I
> could come up with was a discussion that offered a guess of low 2's (I
> chose 2.2) ... the specular is not very saturated but the roughness has
> a fair amount of bloom ... with a bit more lighting work I think it will
> look fine.
>
> I've also been working on a crinkled foil texture to wrap around an ovus
> or two ... after all whats a chocolate bunny without a few chocolate
> eggs to keep him company ... right!
For chocolate, I'd look at the ior of water (1.3), some oils and organic
greases like butter and shortnings, obviously NON-melted.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/17/2011 01:16 PM, Alain wrote:>
> For chocolate, I'd look at the ior of water (1.3), some oils and organic
> greases like butter and shortnings, obviously NON-melted.
While waiting for a render to complete I did some more digging and found
a list and thought I'd pass it on:
http://www.robinwood.com/Catalog/Technical/Gen3DTuts/Gen3DPages/RefractionIndexList.html
ha-ha ... the ior of Beer is 1.345 sheesh ... now I'm thirsty
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2011/03/17 18:50, Jim Holsenback a écrit :
> On 03/17/2011 01:16 PM, Alain wrote:>
>> For chocolate, I'd look at the ior of water (1.3), some oils and organic
>> greases like butter and shortnings, obviously NON-melted.
>
> While waiting for a render to complete I did some more digging and found
> a list and thought I'd pass it on:
>
>
http://www.robinwood.com/Catalog/Technical/Gen3DTuts/Gen3DPages/RefractionIndexList.html
>
>
> ha-ha ... the ior of Beer is 1.345 sheesh ... now I'm thirsty
>
Looking at that, I think that a value around 1.37~1.44 sould be
reasonable for chocolate.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/18/2011 01:07 PM, Alain wrote:
> Le 2011/03/17 18:50, Jim Holsenback a écrit :
>> On 03/17/2011 01:16 PM, Alain wrote:>
>>> For chocolate, I'd look at the ior of water (1.3), some oils and organic
>>> greases like butter and shortnings, obviously NON-melted.
>>
>> While waiting for a render to complete I did some more digging and found
>> a list and thought I'd pass it on:
>>
>>
http://www.robinwood.com/Catalog/Technical/Gen3DTuts/Gen3DPages/RefractionIndexList.html
>>
>>
>>
>> ha-ha ... the ior of Beer is 1.345 sheesh ... now I'm thirsty
>>
>
> Looking at that, I think that a value around 1.37~1.44 sould be
> reasonable for chocolate.
>
>
> Alain
Well here's take 2, I think I've arrived at chocolate!
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'work.png' (529 KB)
Preview of image 'work.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 18.03.2011 21:43, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
> Well here's take 2, I think I've arrived at chocolate!
thats bunny, err, funny...
...but your lighting seems not to match your HDR map (I assume) as seen
in the reflections.
And I would prefer the chocolate color a bit lighter - sweet not
bitter-sweet - if you know what I mean ;)
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/18/2011 05:58 PM, Ive wrote:
> Am 18.03.2011 21:43, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
>
>> Well here's take 2, I think I've arrived at chocolate!
>
> thats bunny, err, funny...
> ...but your lighting seems not to match your HDR map (I assume) as seen
> in the reflections.
In the background are loft windows from a hdr light map, and I was
trying to simulate a physical light source ... a lamp on the table from
the inner room. Lighting is still a tough challenge for me :-(
>
> And I would prefer the chocolate color a bit lighter - sweet not
> bitter-sweet - if you know what I mean ;)
>
hey choc of any kind is ok by me, but I /do/ love a small piece of dark
choc at the bottom of a cup of coffee :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 18.03.2011 22:23, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
> In the background are loft windows from a hdr light map, and I was
> trying to simulate a physical light source ... a lamp on the table from
> the inner room. Lighting is still a tough challenge for me :-(
>
Your scene gives the impression of an indoor daylight scene and so I
would expect the light coming from the windows being the main light
source - even if some desk lamp is turned on.
Meanwhile I do use HDR *images* rarely as they do always restrict my
freedom in choosing the lighting setup (otherwise things look faked) -
but I *do* always use HDR *lighting*.
E.g. you can put colored boxes with some high emission value into your
scene to get nice highlights within reflective materials.
One of the main rules is to decide what the key-light and what the
fill-lights should be. Playing around with the classical
"Hollywood-Three-Point-Lighting" is a good starting point:
http://www.3drender.com/light/3point.html
(by Pixars's Jeremy Birn himself)
but this is also no *cure all* and the same is true for HDR-image-based
lighting - well it all depends and I guess there is a reason that over
there - where the 'big boys' are playing - is even a challenge *just*
for lighting.
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/18/2011 07:07 PM, Ive wrote:
> Am 18.03.2011 22:23, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
>> In the background are loft windows from a hdr light map, and I was
>> trying to simulate a physical light source ... a lamp on the table from
>> the inner room. Lighting is still a tough challenge for me :-(
>>
> Your scene gives the impression of an indoor daylight scene and so I
> would expect the light coming from the windows being the main light
> source - even if some desk lamp is turned on.
> Meanwhile I do use HDR *images* rarely as they do always restrict my
> freedom in choosing the lighting setup (otherwise things look faked) -
> but I *do* always use HDR *lighting*.
> E.g. you can put colored boxes with some high emission value into your
> scene to get nice highlights within reflective materials.
> One of the main rules is to decide what the key-light and what the
> fill-lights should be. Playing around with the classical
> "Hollywood-Three-Point-Lighting" is a good starting point:
>
> http://www.3drender.com/light/3point.html
> (by Pixars's Jeremy Birn himself)
>
> but this is also no *cure all* and the same is true for HDR-image-based
> lighting - well it all depends and I guess there is a reason that over
> there - where the 'big boys' are playing - is even a challenge *just*
> for lighting.
>
> -Ive
>
hey ... thanks for the pointers and link to the 3 point lighting write
up. Still playing around with a 3 light rig that I can easily change
(based on camera position) and I'm seeing MUCH better results
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 20.03.2011 12:39, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
> hey ... thanks for the pointers and link to the 3 point lighting write
> up. Still playing around with a 3 light rig that I can easily change
> (based on camera position) and I'm seeing MUCH better results
Let us see what you have...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/20/2011 08:46 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 20.03.2011 12:39, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
>
>> hey ... thanks for the pointers and link to the 3 point lighting write
>> up. Still playing around with a 3 light rig that I can easily change
>> (based on camera position) and I'm seeing MUCH better results
>
> Let us see what you have...
When I changed over to 3pt lighting rig the chocolate texture needed an
entirely different tune ... I was WAY too dark. Obviously previous
lighting was really hurting the subsurface effect. Now after change 5424
(and some light help) I'm more in the range for what I'd expect for
various other finish attribute (mainly diffuse) ... but the subsurface
pigment and translucency settings dialed in way more easier this time. I
/did/ have some greenish artifacts in the crevices that aren't there now
... 5424?? ... maybe more my lighting foo.
Anyway here's take 3
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'treat.png' (445 KB)
Preview of image 'treat.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 20.03.2011 13:27, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
> pigment and translucency settings dialed in way more easier this time. I
> /did/ have some greenish artifacts in the crevices that aren't there now
> .... 5424?? ... maybe more my lighting foo.
Might well have been change #5424.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/20/2011 11:24 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 20.03.2011 13:27, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
>> pigment and translucency settings dialed in way more easier this time. I
>> /did/ have some greenish artifacts in the crevices that aren't there now
>> .... 5424?? ... maybe more my lighting foo.
>
> Might well have been change #5424.
working on doc adds related to #5428 now ... ha-ha good thing a went
back and QA'ed myself as you /almost/ tripped me up with:
global_settings { subsurface { radiosity BOOL } }
AND
global_settings { radiosity { subsurface BOOL } }
at any rate will have that squared away shortly
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht
news:4d85e786$1@news.povray.org...
> hey ... thanks for the pointers and link to the 3 point lighting write up.
> Still playing around with a 3 light rig that I can easily change (based on
> camera position) and I'm seeing MUCH better results
I seem to remember that Jaime has a 3 point lighting setup scene for
POV-Ray on his site.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
El 22/03/11 09:37, Thomas de Groot escribió:
> I seem to remember that Jaime has a 3 point lighting setup scene for
> POV-Ray on his site.
Not that I remember... perhaps my "studio kit" has some predefined
setup similar to the classic 3-point system, but it's surely not a great
example. I think you are remembering another example from someone
else. I seem to remember a great tutorial using an egg as subject, but
I can't remember right now who did it...
--
Jaime Vives Piqueres
La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jaime Vives Piqueres" <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> schreef in bericht
news:4d8864e8@news.povray.org...
> Not that I remember... perhaps my "studio kit" has some predefined
> setup similar to the classic 3-point system, but it's surely not a great
> example. I think you are remembering another example from someone
> else. I seem to remember a great tutorial using an egg as subject, but
> I can't remember right now who did it...
Yes, I was thinking of your Studio-lighting kit. I confess that that was
some years ago so my memory is a bit dim, but didn.t you use a 3-point
lighting system there?
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
El 23/03/11 09:08, Thomas de Groot escribió:
> Yes, I was thinking of your Studio-lighting kit. I confess that that
> was some years ago so my memory is a bit dim, but didn.t you use a
> 3-point lighting system there?
Yes, there were several setups with 3 lights, but I doubt any of them
is a proper "3-point system"... that, or my memory is dimmer than yours. :)
--
Jaime Vives Piqueres
La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
