Am 07.06.2011 01:51, schrieb H. Karsten:
> So here my suggestion for a new logo.

The "w" in the word "power" is a double "v" ligature, isn't it? :-)

Looks cool. Is that SSLT I'm seeing?

Post a reply to this message

On 06/06/2011 08:59 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 07.06.2011 01:40, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
>
>> Question about pretrace_end ... won't a smaller value make more of the
>> samples to be gathered in the final pass? I thought it was better to
>> shoot for having the final pass sample count about half the total.
>
> No. The smaller the pretrace_end, the higher the density the pretrace
> can theoretically produce, and the fewer therefore the spots missed
> during pretrace, which need to be sampled in the final pass (i.e. the
> render proper).
>
> (Theoretically we'd want the final pass sample count to be zero, but
> then we also want the render to finish in our lifetime.)

in addition to earlier changes I had to increase count to 384 ... it's 
not too darn bad, so I think it's worth the cycles to go to 512 for the 
beauty run. btw: I also corrected my (holy crap) spelling error in the sign.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'ndi.png' (520 KB)

Preview of image 'ndi.png'

I know you only asked about radiosity issues ;)

But I must admit I'm not too fond of the sign and the
logo here, they somehow seem to be artificial intruders in
the environment to me. I liked the earlier logo placement
better. Did you try how the scene looks with sun position
that illuminates the central column so a logo would be
visible without emissive media?

Other ideas might be to paint the logo on the floor
or on the inside of the arc to the right, maybe engrave
text on a floor slab, put up a stone sculpture, or a
mysterious pov-shaped cloud feature in the distance.

Post a reply to this message

On 06/07/2011 03:50 PM, Christian Froeschlin wrote:
> I know you only asked about radiosity issues ;)

hey ... no that's all good. I was wondering if/when I'd get some 
comments about the logo/sign

>
> But I must admit I'm not too fond of the sign and the
> logo here, they somehow seem to be artificial intruders in
> the environment to me. I liked the earlier logo placement
> better. Did you try how the scene looks with sun position
> that illuminates the central column so a logo would be
> visible without emissive media?
>
> Other ideas might be to paint the logo on the floor
> or on the inside of the arc to the right, maybe engrave
> text on a floor slab, put up a stone sculpture, or a
> mysterious pov-shaped cloud feature in the distance.
>

hmmm .. the engrave idea has sparked a notion so I'll try a few things, 
as I was also a bit uneasy about the current presentation ... thanks

Post a reply to this message

Jim Holsenback <nom### [at] nomailcom> wrote:
> On 06/06/2011 08:59 PM, clipka wrote:
> > Am 07.06.2011 01:40, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
> >
> >> Question about pretrace_end ... won't a smaller value make more of the
> >> samples to be gathered in the final pass? I thought it was better to
> >> shoot for having the final pass sample count about half the total.
> >
> > No. The smaller the pretrace_end, the higher the density the pretrace
> > can theoretically produce, and the fewer therefore the spots missed
> > during pretrace, which need to be sampled in the final pass (i.e. the
> > render proper).
> >
> > (Theoretically we'd want the final pass sample count to be zero, but
> > then we also want the render to finish in our lifetime.)
>
> in addition to earlier changes I had to increase count to 384 ... it's
> not too darn bad, so I think it's worth the cycles to go to 512 for the
> beauty run. btw: I also corrected my (holy crap) spelling error in the sign.

Hey Jim,

It's looking good!

Is the water messing with the radiosity? If so--and you don't plan to have
anything reflect in the water--you might be able to use an aoi pattern with a
texture_map, using careful color settings to fake fresnel reflections.

You might also want to try the new version of OTO.inc I dropped in
p.b.scene-files. I improved the size variation of the bricks and trimmed up the
edges.

~Sam

Post a reply to this message

On 06/07/2011 04:24 PM, Samuel Benge wrote:
> Jim Holsenback<nom### [at] nomailcom>  wrote:
>> On 06/06/2011 08:59 PM, clipka wrote:
>>> Am 07.06.2011 01:40, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
>>>
>>>> Question about pretrace_end ... won't a smaller value make more of the
>>>> samples to be gathered in the final pass? I thought it was better to
>>>> shoot for having the final pass sample count about half the total.
>>>
>>> No. The smaller the pretrace_end, the higher the density the pretrace
>>> can theoretically produce, and the fewer therefore the spots missed
>>> during pretrace, which need to be sampled in the final pass (i.e. the
>>> render proper).
>>>
>>> (Theoretically we'd want the final pass sample count to be zero, but
>>> then we also want the render to finish in our lifetime.)
>>
>> in addition to earlier changes I had to increase count to 384 ... it's
>> not too darn bad, so I think it's worth the cycles to go to 512 for the
>> beauty run. btw: I also corrected my (holy crap) spelling error in the sign.
>
> Hey Jim,
>
> It's looking good!
>
> Is the water messing with the radiosity? If so--and you don't plan to have
> anything reflect in the water--you might be able to use an aoi pattern with a
> texture_map, using careful color settings to fake fresnel reflections.

I've got radiosity importance set low on the water so I don't think I 
was the source of my radiosity problems ... since the sun is low I was 
wondering how to get it a bit of color, so maybe the aoi pattern/texture 
map idea is worth some investigation.

>
> You might also want to try the new version of OTO.inc I dropped in
> p.b.scene-files. I improved the size variation of the bricks and trimmed up the
> edges.

Cool ... I was playing around with the tile scaling then ran into a seq 
fault (see my post in beta NG) ... so it'll be interesting to see if 
your new take on OTO makes a diff.

Hasta Bye

Post a reply to this message

On 6/7/2011 12:54 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 04:24 PM, Samuel Benge wrote:
>> Jim Holsenback<nom### [at] nomailcom> wrote:
>>> On 06/06/2011 08:59 PM, clipka wrote:
>>>> Am 07.06.2011 01:40, schrieb Jim Holsenback:
>>>>
>>>>> Question about pretrace_end ... won't a smaller value make more of the
>>>>> samples to be gathered in the final pass? I thought it was better to
>>>>> shoot for having the final pass sample count about half the total.
>>>>
>>>> No. The smaller the pretrace_end, the higher the density the pretrace
>>>> can theoretically produce, and the fewer therefore the spots missed
>>>> during pretrace, which need to be sampled in the final pass (i.e. the
>>>> render proper).
>>>>
>>>> (Theoretically we'd want the final pass sample count to be zero, but
>>>> then we also want the render to finish in our lifetime.)
>>>
>>> in addition to earlier changes I had to increase count to 384 ... it's
>>> not too darn bad, so I think it's worth the cycles to go to 512 for the
>>> beauty run. btw: I also corrected my (holy crap) spelling error in
>>> the sign.
>>
>> Hey Jim,
>>
>> It's looking good!
>>
>> Is the water messing with the radiosity? If so--and you don't plan to
>> have
>> anything reflect in the water--you might be able to use an aoi pattern
>> with a
>> texture_map, using careful color settings to fake fresnel reflections.
>
> I've got radiosity importance set low on the water so I don't think I
> was the source of my radiosity problems ... since the sun is low I was
> wondering how to get it a bit of color, so maybe the aoi pattern/texture
> map idea is worth some investigation.
>
>>
>> You might also want to try the new version of OTO.inc I dropped in
>> p.b.scene-files. I improved the size variation of the bricks and
>> trimmed up the
>> edges.
>
> Cool ... I was playing around with the tile scaling then ran into a seq
> fault (see my post in beta NG) ... so it'll be interesting to see if
> your new take on OTO makes a diff.

It probably won't, and it's not my fault <g> Maybe if you use 
superellipsoids instead of rounded boxes, the memory requirement of the 
macro will be lower (just a guess).

Post a reply to this message

> The "w" in the word "power" is a double "v" ligature, isn't it? :-)

I'm astounded how many people noticing this very little thing :)

> Looks cool. Is that SSLT I'm seeing?

Jep - and it's SLOW!!!

Scene-files now online now!
Have fun :)

Post a reply to this message

On 06/07/2011 10:13 PM, stbenge wrote:
> It probably won't, and it's not my fault <g> Maybe if you use
> superellipsoids instead of rounded boxes, the memory requirement of the
> macro will be lower (just a guess).

Yep ... no difference. The number of parsed tokens sky-rockets when 
scaling is less than 0.75 (OTO). I ended up using twice that in this 
version.

I /really/ like the reflected view but I'm not so sure about the pose. 
The backside illumination on the shrubs turned out cool with the light 
at this angle, I also put some specular and a normal on the floor.

Before I decide if I want to develop this approach and further I figured 
I'd post to see what kind of reaction I get ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'ndi.png' (357 KB)

Preview of image 'ndi.png'

On 4/10/2011 8:38 AM, Le_Forgeron 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)

The scene looks dated, IMO. Maybe we could come up with something new?

-- 
http://isometricland.com

Post a reply to this message