 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26/04/2011 1:28 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> I think you were just going with your comfort zone using bishop to see
> how it looked in the scene ... I think we're past that so poseray with
> object centered with y=0 at bottom of character gives me the best
> flexibility, if I'm not making you jump through too many hoops ;-)
It’s not just a comfort zone. I can’t hold a scene in my head.
I’ve uploaded 4 meshes in p.b.misc including one for the orb placement.
I need to work on the Shirt material so I’ll update that as I work on
it. I’ve not added the second diffuse value. You can modify it in the
MAT file.
Move and scale the meshes as a group.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I have corrected as much as possible the wing positions of the white Pigeon.
Difficult. Poser has a lot of parameters, but folded wings are the most
difficult to get right. Imo, this is better, though.
adapted saturation/lightness to get the white robe and made/added a bump map
too.
Before uploading, what do you think? And you want also the flying pigeon to
be white I suppose? ;-)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'PoserFiguretest.png' (426 KB)
Preview of image 'PoserFiguretest.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
... and corrected the bump size...
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'PoserFiguretest.png' (414 KB)
Preview of image 'PoserFiguretest.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 27/04/2011 10:57, Thomas de Groot a écrit :
> ... and corrected the bump size...
>
> Thomas
>
>
I have an issue with the size of the gland on the beak of the dove (far
too big), as well as the colour of the beak (would need more orange/red).
Also the teint around the eye is more black/dark grey
(have a google search for "dove bird" ?)
--
Software is like dirt - it costs time and money to change it and move it
around.
Just because you can't see it, it doesn't weigh anything,
and you can't drill a hole in it and stick a rivet into it doesn't mean
it's free.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/04/2011 10:29 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> I have an issue with the size of the gland on the beak of the dove (far
> too big), as well as the colour of the beak (would need more orange/red).
>
> Also the teint around the eye is more black/dark grey
>
But how much of the detail will be visible in the render?
You (Thomas that is) could spend days working on it just for them to
appear as small birds in the distance.
I like them.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/27/2011 07:05 AM, Stephen wrote:
> On 27/04/2011 10:29 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
>> I have an issue with the size of the gland on the beak of the dove (far
>> too big), as well as the colour of the beak (would need more orange/red).
>>
>> Also the teint around the eye is more black/dark grey
>>
>
> But how much of the detail will be visible in the render?
> You (Thomas that is) could spend days working on it just for them to
> appear as small birds in the distance.
>
> I like them.
>
yep 2nd shot (better bump map) looks fine .... and yes the distance
makes the fine detail more trouble than we need for this scenario. oh
yeah both white ... thanks thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/27/2011 05:35 AM, Stephen wrote:
> On 26/04/2011 1:28 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>> I think you were just going with your comfort zone using bishop to see
>> how it looked in the scene ... I think we're past that so poseray with
>> object centered with y=0 at bottom of character gives me the best
>> flexibility, if I'm not making you jump through too many hoops ;-)
>
> It’s not just a comfort zone. I can’t hold a scene in my head.
yeah ... know what you mean that's probably why I made the pigeon goof.
This scene is getting to be a bit of a juggling act.
>
> I’ve uploaded 4 meshes in p.b.misc including one for the orb placement.
> I need to work on the Shirt material so I’ll update that as I work on
> it. I’ve not added the second diffuse value. You can modify it in the
> MAT file.
>
> Move and scale the meshes as a group.
>
thank you :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Le_Forgeron" <lef### [at] free fr> schreef in bericht
news:4db7e213@news.povray.org...
> I have an issue with the size of the gland on the beak of the dove (far
> too big), as well as the colour of the beak (would need more orange/red).
>
> Also the teint around the eye is more black/dark grey
Poser figures come "as is". Only way to change the geometry would be by
post-processing in Silo or Wings3D, but that is more trouble than that it's
worth presently, considering the pigeons' size in the render. There is no
way to change the figures in Poser.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht
news:4db7fa63$1@news.povray.org...
> yep 2nd shot (better bump map) looks fine .... and yes the distance makes
> the fine detail more trouble than we need for this scenario. oh yeah both
> white ... thanks thomas
Okidoki! I shall finalize and upload them.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Problem now however, is that I cannot upload to the group due to the size of
the message (about 9 mb). The increase is due I believe to the addition of
normals to the geometry.
Jim, I can make a Big File transfer to you. Is that ok?
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/27/2011 09:18 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Problem now however, is that I cannot upload to the group due to the size of
> the message (about 9 mb). The increase is due I believe to the addition of
> normals to the geometry.
>
> Jim, I can make a Big File transfer to you. Is that ok?
>
> Thomas
>
>
yep
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26/04/2011 11:04 PM, Stephen wrote:
> WHAT!!! You want me to soil my lilywhite hands on software generated code?
>
> Okay, I’ll see what I can do. ;-)
One with a bit of wind, one without.
With is subdivided.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'smca_ndi2a.jpg' (100 KB)
Download 'smca_ndi2b.jpg' (99 KB)
Preview of image 'smca_ndi2a.jpg'
Preview of image 'smca_ndi2b.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2011/04/27 04:49, Thomas de Groot a écrit :
> I have corrected as much as possible the wing positions of the white Pigeon.
> Difficult. Poser has a lot of parameters, but folded wings are the most
> difficult to get right. Imo, this is better, though.
>
> adapted saturation/lightness to get the white robe and made/added a bump map
> too.
>
> Before uploading, what do you think? And you want also the flying pigeon to
> be white I suppose? ;-)
>
> Thomas
>
>
Yes, the olded wings are MUCH beter now.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2011/04/27 02:58, Thomas de Groot a écrit :
> "Alain"<aze### [at] qwertyorg> schreef in bericht
> news:4db6ffeb$1@news.povray.org...
>> The pigeon on the ground just feels wrong. You should not see the wings
>> that much, just hint at them.
>>
>> The one in flight looks correct.
>
> Yeah... I was feeling inconfortable with that too. This is a standard pose
> from Poser. I shall see what I can do.
>
> Thomas
>
>
It can pass, if the bird is some distance away, and not seen from the
front. It's quite possible that if seen from in profile, it may barely show.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/27/2011 03:03 PM, Stephen wrote:
> On 26/04/2011 11:04 PM, Stephen wrote:
>> WHAT!!! You want me to soil my lilywhite hands on software generated
>> code?
>>
>> Okay, I’ll see what I can do. ;-)
>
> One with a bit of wind, one without.
>
> With is subdivided.
>
Well no doubt the one with wind ... Did you use a light group on the
character? I'm still playing around with the version I sent you, but man
I kind of liking where you're headed with yours.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi people
I would like to join the challenge. Is it necessary to have a short code at the
end of the day? Or is it only about the picture?
How about to make a complete new code, that may become extreme big? You could
have it online. And if needed, the people can download the code from the
povray-website.
Best rgds. from the outer Rim
Holger :)
Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
> See p.general : a challenge of sorts
>
> Recreating the image (provided scene is free of rights, update & change
> as you wants)
>
> There is room for improvements.
>
> comment the arealight's line for a very quicker render (but stronger
> shadows)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download '252171749.jpg' (124 KB)
Preview of image '252171749.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht
news:4db81009$1@news.povray.org...
> yep
It's done, Jim. The files are under way to you.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 04/28/2011 04:10 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> "Jim Holsenback"<jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht
> news:4db81009$1@news.povray.org...
>> yep
>
> It's done, Jim. The files are under way to you.
>
> Thomas
>
>
thanks thomas ... got em
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
How is the image progressing?
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/04/2011 05:40 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> How is the image progressing?
>
> Thomas
>
>
In small steps ... I believe Stephen is still working on some minor
issues with the clothing on his character. I'm still tweaking on the
lighting and radiosity ... long time between renders now. RL issues are
proving more of a challenge right now (shop is open) ... stay tuned ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/04/2011 05:40 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> How is the image progressing?
>
> Thomas
>
>
I've had to abandon the notion of having the character up close to the
camera, and this version is the result of a typo, that sent me in
another direction. Now I have to come up with something different to
work the pov logo into the scene (it was in the orb the character is
holding) ... also thinking of getting rid of the stairs.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'ndi.png' (516 KB)
Preview of image 'ndi.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Are there any plans to add that scene to the portfolio of POV-Ray sample
scenes? If so, then the Poser models are most likely a no-go due to
licensing issues. Definitely can't distribute the textures, and most
likely can't distribute meshes either, even in already posed form.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 09/05/2011 12:51 PM, clipka wrote:
> Are there any plans to add that scene to the portfolio of POV-Ray sample
> scenes? If so, then the Poser models are most likely a no-go due to
> licensing issues. Definitely can't distribute the textures, and most
> likely can't distribute meshes either, even in already posed form.
I don't know if Jim had intended to release the whole scene but I doubt
that the Poser model would be included as it and the textures are about
12 Megs in a zipped format.
I've just read the EULA and you are right, permission would be required
to make the meshes and texture maps available.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht
news:4dc7c98c@news.povray.org...
> I've had to abandon the notion of having the character up close to the
> camera, and this version is the result of a typo, that sent me in
> another direction. Now I have to come up with something different to
> work the pov logo into the scene (it was in the orb the character is
> holding) ... also thinking of getting rid of the stairs.
Not bad ;-)
I like the new positions of the figures. They achieve a better balance in
the overall perception of the scene. I understand your doubts about the
stairs. However, getting rid of them will leave the wall quite featureless.
You will need something to break the monotony, e.g. a gate to the outside or
to another courtyard. Is the fountain in the courtyard coming back? That
would influence what you intend to do with the wall.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/10/2011 04:02 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> "Jim Holsenback"<jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht
> news:4dc7c98c@news.povray.org...
>> I've had to abandon the notion of having the character up close to the
>> camera, and this version is the result of a typo, that sent me in
>> another direction. Now I have to come up with something different to
>> work the pov logo into the scene (it was in the orb the character is
>> holding) ... also thinking of getting rid of the stairs.
>
> Not bad ;-)
>
> I like the new positions of the figures. They achieve a better balance in
> the overall perception of the scene. I understand your doubts about the
> stairs. However, getting rid of them will leave the wall quite featureless.
> You will need something to break the monotony, e.g. a gate to the outside or
> to another courtyard. Is the fountain in the courtyard coming back? That
> would influence what you intend to do with the wall.
>
> Thomas
I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do
some work on the ceiling in the background structure. The radiosity is
reaching a bit to far back into the room, it needs to be a bit darker to
make it appear deeper that it really is. The wall's look OK because it's
pigment is only 20% of the outside color, maybe a gradient on the
ceiling will get me where I want it to be. I also found a couple of
light leaks that were causing some hot spots.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'ndi.png' (556 KB)
Preview of image 'ndi.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 17/05/2011 02:35, Jim Holsenback a écrit :
> maybe a gradient on the ceiling
What about a ceiling made of wood, floorboards, seen from under.
The load-bearing wall is the external one (and its parallel wall in
shadow). But the floors above the ground would logically not be made of
stone but of floorboards. Only the load-bearing parts need to be of
stone or beam.
A set of perpendicular beam ( perpendicular to the running wall/arches)
would support shorter floorboards which would be parallel to the wall.
--
Software is like dirt - it costs time and money to change it and move it
around.
Just because you can't see it, it doesn't weigh anything,
and you can't drill a hole in it and stick a rivet into it doesn't mean
it's free.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht
news:4dd1c2da@news.povray.org...
> I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do
> some work on the ceiling in the background structure. The radiosity is
> reaching a bit to far back into the room, it needs to be a bit darker to
> make it appear deeper that it really is. The wall's look OK because it's
> pigment is only 20% of the outside color, maybe a gradient on the
> ceiling will get me where I want it to be. I also found a couple of
> light leaks that were causing some hot spots.
>
>
Sorry to say this, but I feel a bit uneasy about this set up. It is too
symmetrical to my taste, every element repeating. The previous set up was
less monotonous as the walls were different frome ach other. I liked that
better and it generated some tension in the image, even with the blank wall
part where a few narrow windows would also have been possible I realise now.
As for the ceiling, Le Forgeron suggests an interesting solution. I would
suggest myself to build arches over the corridor,instead of main cross
beams.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/17/2011 04:24 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> "Jim Holsenback"<jho### [at] povrayorg> schreef in bericht
> news:4dd1c2da@news.povray.org...
>> I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do
>> some work on the ceiling in the background structure. The radiosity is
>> reaching a bit to far back into the room, it needs to be a bit darker to
>> make it appear deeper that it really is. The wall's look OK because it's
>> pigment is only 20% of the outside color, maybe a gradient on the
>> ceiling will get me where I want it to be. I also found a couple of
>> light leaks that were causing some hot spots.
>>
>>
> Sorry to say this, but I feel a bit uneasy about this set up. It is too
> symmetrical to my taste, every element repeating. The previous set up was
> less monotonous as the walls were different frome ach other. I liked that
> better and it generated some tension in the image, even with the blank wall
> part where a few narrow windows would also have been possible I realise now.
>
> As for the ceiling, Le Forgeron suggests an interesting solution. I would
> suggest myself to build arches over the corridor,instead of main cross
> beams.
>
> Thomas
>
>
>
lol .. you know after i posted i started feeling the same way. the
repetition appeals to my ocd and i have to keep reminding myself not to
fall into that trap. i spent sometime exploring some arch images and i
think i get the drift of what you both were talking about ... thanks for
the nudge
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 17/05/2011 1:35 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>
>
> I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do
> some work on the ceiling in the background structure.
How about googling "Jacobean ceiling patterns" for some ideas.
And do you want another model?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/17/2011 12:24 PM, Stephen wrote:
> On 17/05/2011 1:35 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>>
>>
>> I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do
>> some work on the ceiling in the background structure.
>
> How about googling "Jacobean ceiling patterns" for some ideas.
ah ... I've seen a few of those in my travels, maybe I can find an image
to use for a normal map ;-)
>
> And do you want another model?
>
eventually ... but as you can see my progress on this project has slowed
to something less than that of a snail
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mcavoys_at@aoldotcom> schreef in bericht
news:4dd2931f$1@news.povray.org...
> How about googling "Jacobean ceiling patterns" for some ideas.
That would be nice indeed.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18/05/2011 10:46 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 05/17/2011 12:24 PM, Stephen wrote:
>> On 17/05/2011 1:35 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do
>>> some work on the ceiling in the background structure.
>>
>> How about googling "Jacobean ceiling patterns" for some ideas.
>
> ah ... I've seen a few of those in my travels, maybe I can find an image
> to use for a normal map ;-)
>
I think an actual CSG would be better and give realistic shadows.
>>
>> And do you want another model?
>>
>
> eventually ... but as you can see my progress on this project has slowed
> to something less than that of a snail
Let me know if, when and what.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mcavoys_at@aoldotcom> wrote:
> On 18/05/2011 10:46 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> > On 05/17/2011 12:24 PM, Stephen wrote:
> >> On 17/05/2011 1:35 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do
> >>> some work on the ceiling in the background structure.
> >>
> >> How about googling "Jacobean ceiling patterns" for some ideas.
> >
> > ah ... I've seen a few of those in my travels, maybe I can find an image
> > to use for a normal map ;-)
>
> I think an actual CSG would be better and give realistic shadows.
A height_field would be much easier, IMO. Maybe the new pavement pattern could
be used. Or, if someone can find a simple black/white solid Jacobean ceiling
pattern to use as a base, I've got a POV image beveling script I wrote a while
back to make chiseled height_field objects. Almost any image will work, so just
say the word I'll get it done :)
~Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Samuel Benge" <stb### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Stephen <mcavoys_at@aoldotcom> wrote:
> > On 18/05/2011 10:46 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> > > On 05/17/2011 12:24 PM, Stephen wrote:
> > >> On 17/05/2011 1:35 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> I think I like this set up a bit better ... I see tho that I need to do
> > >>> some work on the ceiling in the background structure.
> > >>
> > >> How about googling "Jacobean ceiling patterns" for some ideas.
> > >
> > > ah ... I've seen a few of those in my travels, maybe I can find an image
> > > to use for a normal map ;-)
> >
> > I think an actual CSG would be better and give realistic shadows.
>
> A height_field would be much easier, IMO. Maybe the new pavement pattern could
> be used. Or, if someone can find a simple black/white solid Jacobean ceiling
> pattern to use as a base, I've got a POV image beveling script I wrote a while
> back to make chiseled height_field objects. Almost any image will work, so just
> say the word I'll get it done :)
OK, here's a quick test. I haven't researched the subject much, just found an
image and processed it into a height map. The top one uses constructive
beveling, the bottom one, destructive. Tell me what you think. I can add extra
borders or whatever...
~Sam
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'jacobeana.png' (102 KB)
Preview of image 'jacobeana.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 20.05.2011 21:13, schrieb Samuel Benge:
> OK, here's a quick test. I haven't researched the subject much, just found an
> image and processed it into a height map. The top one uses constructive
> beveling, the bottom one, destructive. Tell me what you think. I can add extra
> borders or whatever...
Personally I'd prefer the bottom one.
Is it possible to do something in between the two?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 20.05.2011 21:13, schrieb Samuel Benge:
>
> > OK, here's a quick test. I haven't researched the subject much, just found an
> > image and processed it into a height map. The top one uses constructive
> > beveling, the bottom one, destructive. Tell me what you think. I can add extra
> > borders or whatever...
>
> Personally I'd prefer the bottom one.
>
> Is it possible to do something in between the two?
Of course :)
The attached uses a few more beveling steps, and combines the two types evenly.
I could make plenty of minute changes to it, but first I need to extend the
pattern for ceiling use.
Sam
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'jacobeanb.png' (50 KB)
Preview of image 'jacobeanb.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 20/05/2011 8:13 PM, Samuel Benge wrote:
> OK, here's a quick test. I haven't researched the subject much, just found an
> image and processed it into a height map. The top one uses constructive
> beveling, the bottom one, destructive. Tell me what you think. I can add extra
> borders or whatever...
Excellent Sam, the combined image is top class.
I had been thinking something more along the lines of
http://www.tinceilingtile.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Decorative-Ceilings.jpg
Or
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_OthT1uwNPBs/TIriWxVehPI/AAAAAAAACqQ/bGHQ7KaqF7s/s1600/NM1.jpg
For a cloister’s ceiling.
Your work is more suited for an interior as it is so good.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/21/2011 4:02 AM, Stephen wrote:
> On 20/05/2011 8:13 PM, Samuel Benge wrote:
>> OK, here's a quick test. I haven't researched the subject much, just
>> found an
>> image and processed it into a height map. The top one uses constructive
>> beveling, the bottom one, destructive. Tell me what you think. I can
>> add extra
>> borders or whatever...
>
> Excellent Sam, the combined image is top class.
> I had been thinking something more along the lines of
> http://www.tinceilingtile.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Decorative-Ceilings.jpg
>
> Or
>
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_OthT1uwNPBs/TIriWxVehPI/AAAAAAAACqQ/bGHQ7KaqF7s/s1600/NM1.jpg
>
> For a cloister’s ceiling.
>
> Your work is more suited for an interior as it is so good.
I'll try making a cloister's ceiling, as it seems more interesting
without being too busy. If it doesn't get included in the scene, I'll
just find some other use for it :)
What's more important at this point? Saving parse time, render time or
memory?
I must say, Jacobean architecture is very nice. Who knows how the
modernist movement ever took hold :S
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 21/05/2011 19:25, stbenge nous fit lire :
>
> What's more important at this point? Saving parse time, render time or
> memory?
Copyright free components, I would guess.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/21/2011 10:30 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 21/05/2011 19:25, stbenge nous fit lire :
>>
>> What's more important at this point? Saving parse time, render time or
>> memory?
>
> Copyright free components, I would guess.
Hehe, no doubt. I'll be making it from scratch in Illustrator and
POV-Ray, so there /shouldn't/ be a problem...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/05/2011 6:25 PM, stbenge wrote:
> I'll try making a cloister's ceiling, as it seems more interesting
> without being too busy. If it doesn't get included in the scene, I'll
> just find some other use for it :)
>
That's good of you and as you say it might be useful.
> What's more important at this point? Saving parse time, render time or
> memory?
>
I can't say as I'm not doing the rendering. :-D
> I must say, Jacobean architecture is very nice.
It is isn't it? I always enjoy going round stately homes and castles of
that period.
> Who knows how the
> modernist movement ever took hold :S
I imagine it was just a reaction to what went before.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/21/2011 10:57 AM, stbenge wrote:
> On 5/21/2011 10:30 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
>> Le 21/05/2011 19:25, stbenge nous fit lire :
>>>
>>> What's more important at this point? Saving parse time, render time or
>>> memory?
>>
>> Copyright free components, I would guess.
>
> Hehe, no doubt. I'll be making it from scratch in Illustrator and
> POV-Ray, so there /shouldn't/ be a problem...
Good catch, though. I would have happily continued to use a copyrighted
image without thinking about the consequences... I guess I was still
believing in the "3 changes" rule, which is what we used to do at the
publishing company I worked for. I should look it up; I bet we were
infringing on copyrights, right and left...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/21/2011 03:15 PM, stbenge wrote:
> On 5/21/2011 10:57 AM, stbenge wrote:
>> On 5/21/2011 10:30 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
>>> Le 21/05/2011 19:25, stbenge nous fit lire :
>>>>
>>>> What's more important at this point? Saving parse time, render time or
>>>> memory?
>>>
>>> Copyright free components, I would guess.
>>
>> Hehe, no doubt. I'll be making it from scratch in Illustrator and
>> POV-Ray, so there /shouldn't/ be a problem...
>
> Good catch, though. I would have happily continued to use a copyrighted
> image without thinking about the consequences... I guess I was still
> believing in the "3 changes" rule, which is what we used to do at the
> publishing company I worked for. I should look it up; I bet we were
> infringing on copyrights, right and left...
1st off ... apologies for my lack of response lately as I've been busier
than a one arm wall paper hanger ;-)
after some of the comments on my last post i've started sitting with a
sketch pad when there is a lull in the shop trying to get some different
ideas with the structure ... it's a shame that the courtyard tiles
aren't seen better (looks killer from different view) and now the the
jacobean panel that you've developed ... well hopefully i can come up
with something that will do it justice. forge ahead and i'll do my best
to have something as soon as i can, even if i have to put on a big pot
of coffee and pull and all nighter ... excellent work sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/21/2011 10:57 AM, Stephen wrote:
> On 21/05/2011 6:25 PM, stbenge wrote:
>> I'll try making a cloister's ceiling, as it seems more interesting
>> without being too busy. If it doesn't get included in the scene, I'll
>> just find some other use for it :)
>
> That's good of you and as you say it might be useful.
It would be great to have some automatic way to generate the tiles,
complete with floral and geometrical accents.
>> What's more important at this point? Saving parse time, render time or
>> memory?
>
> I can't say as I'm not doing the rendering. :-D
Ah, OK. Maybe Jim will speak up :)
>> Who knows how the
>> modernist movement ever took hold :S
>
> I imagine it was just a reaction to what went before.
What, like people burned out their aesthetic response, and just couldn't
handle the overload anymore? :P Modern architecture is so bleak and
hopeless, sterile and empty. I'd be tempted to find a prime example and
covertly deface it with some bit of fine art :D
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 21 May 2011 19:30:03 +0200, Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
> Le 21/05/2011 19:25, stbenge nous fit lire :
>>
>> What's more important at this point? Saving parse time, render time or
>> memory?
>
> Copyright free components, I would guess.
>
I would also like to suggest portability (not too large a file). It would
be great if the scene could be included in the samples.
--
-Nekar Xenos-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/05/2011 7:52 PM, stbenge wrote:
> On 5/21/2011 10:57 AM, Stephen wrote:
>> On 21/05/2011 6:25 PM, stbenge wrote:
>>> I'll try making a cloister's ceiling, as it seems more interesting
>>> without being too busy. If it doesn't get included in the scene, I'll
>>> just find some other use for it :)
>>
>> That's good of you and as you say it might be useful.
>
> It would be great to have some automatic way to generate the tiles,
> complete with floral and geometrical accents.
>
I’ve been thinking about that myself and they are mostly plaster of
Paris put on using a mould then hand painted or gilded.
So for the square lattice type a simple while loop would do. The
paintings in the gaps could be applied separately
>>> Who knows how the
>>> modernist movement ever took hold :S
>>
>> I imagine it was just a reaction to what went before.
>
> What, like people burned out their aesthetic response, and just couldn't
> handle the overload anymore? :P
No, the new generation of artists wanted to do something radically
different.
> Modern architecture is so bleak and
> hopeless, sterile and empty. I'd be tempted to find a prime example and
> covertly deface it with some bit of fine art :D
>
LOL, your idea of modernist is different than mine. I know what you mean
though. In those days artisans and materials came cheap but today there
are so many regulations the buildings have to be built to, Gothic is out
of the reach of everyone.
Still some modern buildings have their own beauty.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/21/2011 11:48 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 05/21/2011 03:15 PM, stbenge wrote:
>> On 5/21/2011 10:57 AM, stbenge wrote:
>>> On 5/21/2011 10:30 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
>>>> Le 21/05/2011 19:25, stbenge nous fit lire :
>>>>>
>>>>> What's more important at this point? Saving parse time, render time or
>>>>> memory?
>>>>
>>>> Copyright free components, I would guess.
>>>
>>> Hehe, no doubt. I'll be making it from scratch in Illustrator and
>>> POV-Ray, so there /shouldn't/ be a problem...
>>
>> Good catch, though. I would have happily continued to use a copyrighted
>> image without thinking about the consequences... I guess I was still
>> believing in the "3 changes" rule, which is what we used to do at the
>> publishing company I worked for. I should look it up; I bet we were
>> infringing on copyrights, right and left...
>
> 1st off ... apologies for my lack of response lately as I've been busier
> than a one arm wall paper hanger ;-)
It happens, no apology necessary :)
> after some of the comments on my last post i've started sitting with a
> sketch pad when there is a lull in the shop trying to get some different
> ideas with the structure ...
Sketches are definitely a great way to design a 3D scene. I've got some
weird free-association sketches that would probably make very cool 3D
renders. Some of the best ideas are the ones that are nearly accidental...
> it's a shame that the courtyard tiles
> aren't seen better (looks killer from different view)
I did improve the tile variation since I posted the macro. Long,
straight joints spanning several bricks don't happen as often anymore.
If you want the update, just say the word.
> and now the
> jacobean panel that you've developed ... well hopefully i can come up
> with something that will do it justice.
The one I posted won't be the one used, for copyright reasons. But I'll
come up with something, plus an easy way to tile an area.
> forge ahead and i'll do my best
> to have something as soon as i can, even if i have to put on a big pot
> of coffee and pull and all nighter ... excellent work sam
Thanks. I might just do the same :D
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 05/21/2011 04:21 PM, Stephen wrote:
> Still some modern buildings have their own beauty.
yep ... modern-ish in age I suppose (built in 1915). the whole complex
is loaded with eye candy. My son and I (when he was a little shaver)
didn't have too much trouble spending the /whole/ day wandering around.
One of my all time favorites
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palace_of_Fine_Arts
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/21/2011 11:56 AM, Nekar Xenos wrote:
> On Sat, 21 May 2011 19:30:03 +0200, Le_Forgeron <jgr### [at] freefr> wrote:
>
>> Le 21/05/2011 19:25, stbenge nous fit lire :
>>>
>>> What's more important at this point? Saving parse time, render time or
>>> memory?
>>
>> Copyright free components, I would guess.
>
> I would also like to suggest portability (not too large a file). It
> would be great if the scene could be included in the samples.
Hmm. Well, technically one would only need 1/4 of the original height
map, since it can be copied & mirrored to produce a full tile. Or I
could go the CSG route, which complicates things but keeps the file size
lower.
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/21/2011 12:21 PM, Stephen wrote:
> On 21/05/2011 7:52 PM, stbenge wrote:
>> On 5/21/2011 10:57 AM, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 21/05/2011 6:25 PM, stbenge wrote:
>>>> Who knows how the
>>>> modernist movement ever took hold :S
>>>
>>> I imagine it was just a reaction to what went before.
>>
>> What, like people burned out their aesthetic response, and just couldn't
>> handle the overload anymore? :P
>
> No, the new generation of artists wanted to do something radically
> different.
>
>> Modern architecture is so bleak and
>> hopeless, sterile and empty. I'd be tempted to find a prime example and
>> covertly deface it with some bit of fine art :D
>
> LOL, your idea of modernist is different than mine. I know what you mean
> though. In those days artisans and materials came cheap but today there
> are so many regulations the buildings have to be built to, Gothic is out
> of the reach of everyone.
> Still some modern buildings have their own beauty.
I was going from what I could find here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_architecture and also from the few
buildings I've seen by Frank Lloyd Wright. There are some interesting
ideas spanning many different styles, but by and large, most designs
tend toward the utilitarian (form follows function) and simplistic. But
I won't deny that there /are/ some buildings that manage to be useful
/and/ look good.
As a person who loves detailed art and stylized geometry, I find most
modern architecture boring and just a little soul-destroying.
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
