 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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] free fr> 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.
>
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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/05/2011 8:58 PM, stbenge wrote:
> 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.
>
Well you are not alone in your views. I could say that you are in the
company of Prince Charles but I'm not that cruel. ;-)
This is a difficult subject to be objective about.
I saw many examples of attractive buildings in the link you posted. But
then I was brought up in Glasgow, a very industrial city in my youth. I
see beauty in lots of industrial settings. I even found the Oil Rigs I
worked on had a strange beauty. The juxtaposition of wind farms against
the beauty of nature is something I find attractive to look at. Even
though I wouldn't want to live there.
I wonder, do you like the music of Bach?
> As a person who loves detailed art and stylized geometry, I find most
> modern architecture boring and just a little soul-destroying.
I do think that most modern housing is an eyesore.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21/05/2011 8:41 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> 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
>
It knocks the Glasgow palace of art into a cocked hat.
http://www.theglasgowstory.com/image.php?inum=TGSE01309&t=1&urltp=story.php?id=TGSFH08
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
