 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28-7-2013 19:41, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degroot org> wrote:
>> What about this?
>
> The tetrapods are easier to see with the new skin colors.
>
> The sand looks a bit too turbulent, but is otherwise an improvement over the
> straight corrugation of the first draft. Also, the form of the sand abruptly
> almost disappears in the shadow areas, and the animal on the right looks like
> it's floating. Did you raise the radiosity error_bound for this draft?
Yes... I am not entirely satisfied yet with the sand. The belly of the
animal is above ground; the visible paw is firmly on the ground.
>
>> I have some doubts about the quartz grains I added...
>
> They don't seem to scale with distance from the camera.
The distance is short anyway. I could scale them down with distance though.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28-7-2013 19:41, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> The sand looks a bit too turbulent, but is otherwise an improvement over the
> straight corrugation of the first draft.
I just found out that the /turbulence/ is caused by a gross error of
mine in mistreating the texture ;-) This also made the quartz grains
stand out strangely against the sand.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Postcard from the Permian [wip 03]
Date: 29 Jul 2013 07:07:41
Message: <51f64cfd@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
OK. This is what I want it to be.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'elements of geology4_08.jpg' (259 KB)
Preview of image 'elements of geology4_08.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Thomas de Groot on date 29/07/2013 13.07 wrote:
> OK. This is what I want it to be.
>
> Thomas
>
Very impressive!
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 29-7-2013 13:31, Paolo Gibellini wrote:
> Very impressive!
> Paolo
Thanks, Paolo.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> OK. This is what I want it to be.
Much better!
Although the right animal's left forefoot still looks like it's floating; it
doesn't show enough ambient occlusion. This suggests to me, "error_bound is too
high." Lowering it would add to the render time, but without the high
turbulence on the sand, you might be able to forgo the radiosity normal on.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Cousin Ricky" <rickysttATyahooDOTcom> wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> > OK. This is what I want it to be.
>
> Much better!
Indeed!
> Although the right animal's left forefoot still looks like it's floating; it
> doesn't show enough ambient occlusion. This suggests to me, "error_bound is too
> high." Lowering it would add to the render time, but without the high
> turbulence on the sand, you might be able to forgo the radiosity normal on.
I cannot see that it's floating, but may be I'm just to blind for that having
only 50% eyesight. The problem may be the belly indeed. Smaller lizzards are
dragging it over the ground but your ones are more comparable to komodo dragons
which did not (all the time). So I think we should stop nitpicking and simply
admire Thomas's wonderful work.
Best regards,
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 29-7-2013 21:33, MichaelJF wrote:
> "Cousin Ricky" <rickysttATyahooDOTcom> wrote:
>> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>>> OK. This is what I want it to be.
>>
>> Much better!
>
> Indeed!
>
>> Although the right animal's left forefoot still looks like it's floating; it
>> doesn't show enough ambient occlusion. This suggests to me, "error_bound is too
>> high." Lowering it would add to the render time, but without the high
>> turbulence on the sand, you might be able to forgo the radiosity normal on.
>
> I cannot see that it's floating, but may be I'm just to blind for that having
> only 50% eyesight. The problem may be the belly indeed. Smaller lizzards are
> dragging it over the ground but your ones are more comparable to komodo dragons
> which did not (all the time). So I think we should stop nitpicking and simply
> admire Thomas's wonderful work.
>
Presently, my error_bound is 1.0 which might indeed still be a bit too
high. However, what is visible is the back part of the paw which is not
completely on the ground. The fore part is hidden by the rock.
Indeed Michael, this /is/ a Komodo dragon :-) Totally anachronistic but
who cares? The image is not intended to be published in Nature. There
are Permian animal models to be bought on the web at ContentParadise,
but I find it a bit silly to buy a model just for one image, even if the
price is affordable.
As far as belly dragging is concerned, reptiles lift their belly when
active, even crocodiles do. The reptiles from the Permian are often
pictured in an erect pose (Lystrosaurus, Moschops for instance); see
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHJDejFGDwk. I am not too sure if that is
their most common pose considering their anatomy, but there it is.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 30/07/2013 7:54 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Indeed Michael, this /is/ a Komodo dragon :-)
I have only seen a Komodo dragon once and this one looks too happy. o_O
From what I was told by its keeper. They are really bad tempered and
show it. Yours looks quite amicable. :-)
> Totally anachronistic but who cares?
Not I, for one.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> On 30/07/2013 7:54 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> Indeed Michael, this /is/ a Komodo dragon :-)
>
> I have only seen a Komodo dragon once and this one looks too happy. o_O
>
> From what I was told by its keeper. They are really bad tempered and
> show it. Yours looks quite amicable. :-)
>
>
>> Totally anachronistic but who cares?
>
> Not I, for one.
>
They may somewhat less bad tempered when among themselves, and who know,
those two may be in the middle of courtship....
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
