 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 28.08.2012 14:55, schrieb Jaime Vives Piqueres:
> But you proved to have patience, a virtue with which I was not gifted
> at birth...
No surprise there: Patience is always an acquired skill ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/08/12 15:42, clipka wrote:
> To the contrary: It typically shoots fewer of them, four in the ideal
> case. The adaptive parameter isn't a boolean that turns adaptive on,
> but a numeric value governing the minimum number of rays to shoot:
>
> 0 -> 2x2 1 -> 3x3 2 -> 5x5 3 -> 9x9 4 -> 17x17 ... N -> (2^N +1)x(2^N
> +1)
>
> As for the 6x6 area light, if you use the "adaptive" keyword you'll
> automatically get a 9x9 area light instead.
>
It's amazing how I can get to use these things with decent results,
given that I understand so little of how they work... :(
--
Jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/08/12 15:47, clipka wrote:
> Am 28.08.2012 14:55, schrieb Jaime Vives Piqueres:
>
>> But you proved to have patience, a virtue with which I was not
>> gifted at birth...
>
> No surprise there: Patience is always an acquired skill ;-)
>
Then it should be that I was not gifted with the ability to acquire
such skill...
--
Jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 28.08.2012 15:49, schrieb Jaime Vives Piqueres:
> On 28/08/12 15:42, clipka wrote:
>> To the contrary: It typically shoots fewer of them, four in the ideal
>> case. The adaptive parameter isn't a boolean that turns adaptive on,
>> but a numeric value governing the minimum number of rays to shoot:
>>
>> 0 -> 2x2 1 -> 3x3 2 -> 5x5 3 -> 9x9 4 -> 17x17 ... N -> (2^N +1)x(2^N
>> +1)
>>
>> As for the 6x6 area light, if you use the "adaptive" keyword you'll
>> automatically get a 9x9 area light instead.
>>
>
> It's amazing how I can get to use these things with decent results,
> given that I understand so little of how they work... :(
I would make that a ":)" because hey, it indicates that POV-Ray area
lights are pretty easy to use for good result ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jaime Vives Piqueres <jai### [at] ignorancia org> wrote:
> On 28/08/12 08:56, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> > Very good indeed! Now even better would be to show the wear of the
> > keys and a yellowish ivory tint on the white ones: i. e. an old
> > piano; this one looks too new and too plastic ;-)
>
> Yeah... but I was taking as reference my Korg Wavestation EX, which is
> still almost new... :)
>
> --
> Jaime
Alain was quiet right, as ever. For a piano an organ is a bad reference due to
the plastic keys. But I think the differences between a Korg Wavestation and a
Technics SX-GN6 are smaller. But yes, the black keys shows a very smaller SSLT
than the white ones and one really should consider the efforts before modelling
it. And - as I took another road the way back home today, which leads to our
local piano dealer - the black keys on real pianos showed only a very slight
SSLT even. Fortunatelly the shop was closed and I had to look through the
display windows and not to explain a salesman why I only would like to look at
the black keys of his pianos ;-)
Best regards,
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> On 28/08/12 02:37, Alain wrote:
>> A 6x6 area light? Why not a 9x9 or even 17x17 or 33x33 using
>> adaptive 0? In this case, adaptive 0 don't realy risk to cause any
>> visible artefacts, and willbe much faster while giving you smoother
>> penumbras.
>
> I've used always "jitter adaptive 1" for years... wouldn't "adaptive
> 0" shot more rays, thus being slower?
adaptive 0 start with only 4 samples, taken at the corners, while
adaptive 1 start with 9, in a 3x3 array, taken at the corners and at the
mid point between them.
6x6 don't subdivide effeciently. 5x5, 9x9, 17x17, 33x33, 65x65,... all
subdivide with the maximum effeciency.
>
>> For Michael, your organ probably have plastic keys. For most classic
>> pianos, the white keys are ivory and the black ones are maogany or
>> black dyed hard wood if it's a cheap one. Whites have SSLT, blacks
>> don't have any, or so little that it can be ignored.
>
> I just tested, and SSLT with an almost black pigment doesn't get much
> noticeable, almost no difference at all. I guess the light would have to
> be very close to the object to have an appreciable effect.
>
> --
> Jaime
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
High!
On 27.08.2012 21:07, MichaelJF wrote:
>I just took a look at my long
> abandoned organ and they seem to have the same SSLT as the white but only
> another colour.
What organ is it? A Hammond?
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Now playing: Naked Eye (Simple Minds)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
High!
On 28.08.2012 02:37, Alain wrote:
> For Michael, your organ probably have plastic keys.
Yes, most electronic organs do... but vintage Hammonds from the 1930s to
1960s (at least the B3 model) usually have wooden keys!
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Now playing: Citizen (Dance Of Youth) (Simple Minds)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
High!
On 28.08.2012 21:06, MichaelJF wrote:
> Alain was quiet right, as ever. For a piano an organ is a bad
> reference due to the plastic keys. But I think the differences
> between a Korg Wavestation and a Technics SX-GN6 are smaller.
Cool, another Technics player here around! I own an SX-G5, semi-digital
from 1984 (although an SX-U90 or SX-G7 would have been my first
choice... but, beggars can't be choosers, I got it for free!).
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Now playing: Factory (Simple Minds)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
