On 7-10-2012 13:43, Stephen wrote:
> Yes but don't you find that the faster the machine you have the more you
> want to do with it?

Yes and no in fact. I still try to do an as /stream-lined/ job as possible.


> I generally make the full model, save it, then strip out the parts that
> can't be seen directly or in reflection. Just for performance.

Indeed. I also trim down as much as possible.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 07/10/2012 3:02 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 7-10-2012 13:43, Stephen wrote:
>> Yes but don't you find that the faster the machine you have the more you
>> want to do with it?
>
> Yes and no in fact. I still try to do an as /stream-lined/ job as possible.
>

I am beginning to learn that lesson.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 7-10-2012 16:30, Stephen wrote:
> I am beginning to learn that lesson.
>

There always is a trade off but the possibility to do more complex 
scenes than 10 or 15 years ago is the great benefit overall. In most 
cases, I never have to think about machine limitations any more.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 07/10/2012 3:43 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 7-10-2012 16:30, Stephen wrote:
>> I am beginning to learn that lesson.
>>
>
> There always is a trade off but the possibility to do more complex
> scenes than 10 or 15 years ago is the great benefit overall. In most
> cases, I never have to think about machine limitations any more.
>

Well it must be because I use Bishop3D. That is where my bottleneck must 
be. I really hate the way it handles meshes but I love the way it can 
import Pov files.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Hi(gh)! (back on the scene after fixing some problems with my DSL adaptor)

> There always is a trade off but the possibility to do more complex
> scenes than 10 or 15 years ago is the great benefit overall. In most
> cases, I never have to think about machine limitations any more.

If one aims at entire consistent worlds (like I do) rather than single 
high-quality artistic scenes (which of course would mean leaving out any 
detail in the back of the camera which is not essential for the scene 
proper), the appropriate machine probably never will be built.

On the other hand, the more powerful computers develop, the more 
difficult and time-consuming making use of their full potential will be 
- even to the point that you wish to work with more sophisticated tools 
than pure POV SDL. Probably Blender?

See you in Khyberspace!

Yadgar

Post a reply to this message

On 15-10-2012 22:10, Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann wrote:
> Hi(gh)! (back on the scene after fixing some problems with my DSL adaptor)

Missed you indeed.

>
>> There always is a trade off but the possibility to do more complex
>> scenes than 10 or 15 years ago is the great benefit overall. In most
>> cases, I never have to think about machine limitations any more.
>
> If one aims at entire consistent worlds (like I do) rather than single
> high-quality artistic scenes (which of course would mean leaving out any
> detail in the back of the camera which is not essential for the scene
> proper), the appropriate machine probably never will be built.

The main problem, I guess, is the fact that the time needed just to 
model increases exponentially while the project grows, being it a whole 
world or just scenes from a world. A lifetime is not enough by far. If 
one really would want to achieve significant progress then a kind of 
huge coordinated collaboration (something resembling Galaxy Zoo?) or a 
dedicated enterprise would be needed... ;-)
Personally, I am just content to slowly explore my world and discover 
new things around the corner unexpectedly. I am often much surprised by 
what I find.

>
> On the other hand, the more powerful computers develop, the more
> difficult and time-consuming making use of their full potential will be
> - even to the point that you wish to work with more sophisticated tools
> than pure POV SDL. Probably Blender?

Yes, that is certainly the case. Personally, I use external tools for 
most of the work, bringing the results together in POV for the scene 
building and some POV-specific modelling of course.
Blender is something I am (slowly) learning, but my principal tools are 
Silo2Pro, Poser, Poseray, and GeoControl, and a collection of others for 
particular cases.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Hi(gh)!

On 16.10.2012 09:30, Thomas de Groot wrote:
 >
 > The main problem, I guess, is the fact that the time needed just to
 > model increases exponentially while the project grows, being it a
 > whole world or just scenes from a world. A lifetime is not enough by 
 > far.

There are principally two solutions to this problem: either increasing 
the lifespan of the individual by several orders of magnitude (at my 
current pace, I would be done with the terrain relief of entire 
Afghanistan not before 2750 - unless I find a way to drastically reduce 
the time for interpolating the contour lines from those 1:100,000 
Soviet-made topographic maps... but even then alone building the terrain 
would take me several decades...

 > If one really would want to achieve significant progress then a kind 
 > of huge coordinated collaboration (something resembling Galaxy Zoo?) 
  > or a dedicated enterprise would be needed... ;-)

...or, yes, finding A LOT OF people working together in this task! But 
the probability of finding only ten people on this planet which are both 
3D and Afghanistan enthusiasts to embark on such a huge project is next 
to zero - who on Earth needs Khyberspace? Then with all the intricate 
twists and turns of global politics in the clash of civilizations 
between the West and the Islamic world... just imagine what could happen 
if any Khyberspace programmer is uncautious enough to accidentally draw 
the ire of some jihadists toward the project! Not only Afghan nationals 
involved in Khyberspace could be in serious danger then! At the moment I 
seriously doubt whether I ever should make Khyberspace public...

 > Yes, that is certainly the case. Personally, I use external tools
 > for most of the work, bringing the results together in POV for the
 > scene building and some POV-specific modelling of course.
 > Blender is something I am (slowly) learning,

I also started working through the 1,800-page manual of the current 2.63 
version...

 > but my principal tools are Silo2Pro, Poser, Poseray, and GeoControl,

GeoControl? Does it also provide a way to convert geodesical (i. e. also 
heightfield coordinates derived from a large-scale topographic map) into 
geographic coordinates? Would be very convenient for me...

See you in Khyberspace!

Yadgar

Now playing: To One In Paradise (The Alan Parsons Project)

Post a reply to this message

On 21-10-2012 3:38, Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann wrote:
> Hi(gh)!
>
> On 16.10.2012 09:30, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>  >
>  > The main problem, I guess, is the fact that the time needed just to
>  > model increases exponentially while the project grows, being it a
>  > whole world or just scenes from a world. A lifetime is not enough by
>  > far.
>
> There are principally two solutions to this problem: either increasing
> the lifespan of the individual by several orders of magnitude (at my
> current pace, I would be done with the terrain relief of entire
> Afghanistan not before 2750 - unless I find a way to drastically reduce
> the time for interpolating the contour lines from those 1:100,000
> Soviet-made topographic maps... but even then alone building the terrain
> would take me several decades...

LOL Yes indeed. The philosophical conclusion of this would be to be 
happy with what we are humbly able to achieve within our lifetime.

>
>  > If one really would want to achieve significant progress then a kind
>  > of huge coordinated collaboration (something resembling Galaxy Zoo?)
>   > or a dedicated enterprise would be needed... ;-)
>
> ...or, yes, finding A LOT OF people working together in this task! But
> the probability of finding only ten people on this planet which are both
> 3D and Afghanistan enthusiasts to embark on such a huge project is next
> to zero - who on Earth needs Khyberspace? Then with all the intricate
> twists and turns of global politics in the clash of civilizations
> between the West and the Islamic world... just imagine what could happen
> if any Khyberspace programmer is uncautious enough to accidentally draw
> the ire of some jihadists toward the project! Not only Afghan nationals
> involved in Khyberspace could be in serious danger then! At the moment I
> seriously doubt whether I ever should make Khyberspace public...

Yes, this certainly is an issue and not a small one.

> GeoControl? Does it also provide a way to convert geodesical (i. e. also
> heightfield coordinates derived from a large-scale topographic map) into
> geographic coordinates? Would be very convenient for me...

I am not sure. I am using an older version presently which can import 
files from Terragen, Carrara, Bryce, or Vue, including image_maps. 
However, you can visit the site for more info:

http://www.cajomi.de/GeoControl/geocontrol.htm

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Am 03.10.2012 13:10, schrieb Thomas de Groot:

>> I'm still hesitant on one point: the moire that appears on the parcels.
>> It is somehow ok, as reflecting the texture of the material (not in
>> Pov-sdl meaning),yet it's an artefact shooting loud about computer
>> graphics.
>
> I don't know what to do about it. It is the cloth texture image_map and
> normal_map doing this of course. One possibility is making the cloth
> coarser.

An ever-so-slight focal blur might help, too. It's sometimes superior to AA.

Post a reply to this message

On 24-10-2012 0:20, clipka wrote:
> An ever-so-slight focal blur might help, too. It's sometimes superior to
> AA.

Yes, that is true. I shall keep that in mind and have try at it, 
especially when the scene is being completed (whenever that shall be...).

Thomas

Post a reply to this message