 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Making a DF3 file from a mesh2 object
Date: 23 Sep 2013 07:45:34
Message: <524029de@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
My first test, using a modified version of Gilles Tran's cloud macro,
then tga2df3.exe, and a Poser head. Note that I first closed /all/ the
holes in the mesh2 object before using it. This is absolutely essential.
99 slices.
Not bad at all.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'gt_df3_test.png' (71 KB)
Preview of image 'gt_df3_test.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Making a DF3 file from a mesh2 object
Date: 23 Sep 2013 10:53:29
Message: <524055e9@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Now, the previous image was based on a df3 generation without focal blur
(Aperture parameter in Gilles Tran's macro). With a bit of focal bur
(Aperture 1) you get a more fuzzy image like this.
More transformations can be obtained by the use of warp {turbulence}
within the density block of the media but be aware that the basic shape
of the object is soon lost, and that may not be the intention.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'gt_df3_test.png' (61 KB)
Preview of image 'gt_df3_test.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 09/23/2013 10:53 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Now, the previous image was based on a df3 generation without focal blur
> (Aperture parameter in Gilles Tran's macro). With a bit of focal bur
> (Aperture 1) you get a more fuzzy image like this.
>
> More transformations can be obtained by the use of warp {turbulence}
> within the density block of the media but be aware that the basic shape
> of the object is soon lost, and that may not be the intention.
>
> Thomas
And you completely took away our saying we are green with envy...
These look great and are much more detailed with respect to the head
shape than what I did with the ghost image. As to your last statement
about warp { turbulence }, remember Jamie's trick to scale turbulence
with respect to an object/pattern. It is a trick I used in the ghost
image. Namely:
// Credit: Jaime Vives Piqueres for warp turbulence scaling. Tierra zip.
www.ignorancia.org.
#macro WarpShapesA_2 ()
scale 1.0/0.9000
warp {
turbulence 0.1500
octaves 6
lambda 2.0000
omega 0.6500
}
scale 0.9
#end
So to have a lot of scaled down, but heavier, turbulence, you first
scale the "thing" up, apply the turbulence warp, then scale everything
back to the original size.
Bill P.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degroot org> wrote:
> Now, the previous image was based on a df3 generation without focal blur
> (Aperture parameter in Gilles Tran's macro). With a bit of focal bur
> (Aperture 1) you get a more fuzzy image like this.
>
> More transformations can be obtained by the use of warp {turbulence}
> within the density block of the media but be aware that the basic shape
> of the object is soon lost, and that may not be the intention.
Cool!
I'm concerned that the focal blur only blurs the volume along 2 axes.
Also, adding turbulence can result in very slow renders. Sometimes it's possible
to hide a granite pattern in a volume-based pigment_pattern instead... this is
usually faster than using turbulence. Or, you can try to get away with fewer
turbulence octaves... but of course I'm always trying to maximize my PPS :)
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 23-9-2013 17:11, William F Pokorny wrote:
> And you completely took away our saying we are green with envy...
LOL
>
> These look great and are much more detailed with respect to the head
> shape than what I did with the ghost image. As to your last statement
> about warp { turbulence }, remember Jamie's trick to scale turbulence
> with respect to an object/pattern. It is a trick I used in the ghost
> image. Namely:
Yes, I knew that. It is a trick I use quite often indeed. Didn't
remember that it came from Jaime ;-)
Obviously there are more things that can be achieved, so I go on
exploring...
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Making a DF3 file from a mesh2 object
Date: 24 Sep 2013 03:11:09
Message: <52413b0d@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 23-9-2013 18:52, Samuel Benge wrote:
> Cool!
<grin>
>
> I'm concerned that the focal blur only blurs the volume along 2 axes.
Really? I don't think so. When you follow the tracing of the slices, you
can see that blurring also occurs along the z-axis. This is taken into
account in the final df3.
>
> Also, adding turbulence can result in very slow renders. Sometimes it's possible
> to hide a granite pattern in a volume-based pigment_pattern instead... this is
> usually faster than using turbulence. Or, you can try to get away with fewer
> turbulence octaves... but of course I'm always trying to maximize my PPS :)
Yes, I noticed the slow down. One of the things I want to try is indeed
what you suggest.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Making a DF3 file from a mesh2 object
Date: 24 Sep 2013 07:46:28
Message: <52417b94@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Exploring ghosts.
This could be some kind of ectoplasma. Using the First def3 density
file, with an added spherical density within the same media.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'gt_df3_test.png' (92 KB)
Preview of image 'gt_df3_test.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Making a DF3 file from a mesh2 object
Date: 24 Sep 2013 09:59:50
Message: <52419ad6@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
...or like this.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'gt_df3_test.png' (88 KB)
Preview of image 'gt_df3_test.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Thomas de Groot on date 24/09/2013 15.59 wrote:
> ...or like this.
>
> Thomas
This is creepy!
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> ...or like this.
Hmm, that /is/ kinda creepy.
Reminds me of a dream I had once... I dreamed that when we die, out bodies began
to enlarge slowly, and pretty soon we were big, translucent human shapes -- much
like clouds -- floating in the skies.
I guess that it would be true in one sense, because the electromagnetic energy
that our bodies produce (including the EM energy coming from our brains) expands
outward spherically (more or less). Which star systems are 36 light years away
from us, anyway? My ever-expanding "sphere" has probably reached them by now ;)
(Assuming, of course, that the universe is continuous and my EM field hasn't
encountered problems along the way, not to mention that fact that Sol and its
subjects don't stay put.)
Oh yeah, real ghosts would look different than they appear in the movies, BTW.
Real ghosts would probably show veins, organs, bones, etc. But nobody really
thinks about that, so it's all good :)
Sam
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Jaime Vives Piqueres
Subject: Re: Making a DF3 file from a mesh2 object
Date: 24 Sep 2013 12:13:33
Message: <5241ba2d$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
El 24/09/13 17:49, Samuel Benge escribió:
> Hmm, that /is/ kinda creepy.
...and looks toxic too!
> Reminds me of a dream I had once... I dreamed that when we die, out bodies began
> to enlarge slowly, and pretty soon we were big, translucent human shapes -- much
> like clouds -- floating in the skies.
Don't know why, but I was almost sure you dreams had to be *really*
strange. ;)
> Oh yeah, real ghosts would look different than they appear in the movies, BTW.
> Real ghosts would probably show veins, organs, bones, etc. But nobody really
> thinks about that, so it's all good :)
Real ghosts would surely get dispersed quickly by the most gentle breeze.
--
Jaime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jaime Vives Piqueres <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote:
> Real ghosts would surely get dispersed quickly by the most gentle breeze.
>
Most likely that is why most of them haunt covered places only. If someone is
interested, the Wikipedia holds a comprehensive list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_reportedly_haunted_locations_in_the_world
Personally I like the last one most. Really good work Thomas! Will we see it
stalking Gancaloon?
Best regards,
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24-9-2013 17:49, Samuel Benge wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> ...or like this.
>
> Hmm, that /is/ kinda creepy.
It is indeed. Something nobody noticed yet ;-) the shape is squeezed
along the x-axis. Presently, I don't know why this is; either during the
slicing or during the df3 generation. I need to look into this.
>
> Reminds me of a dream I had once... I dreamed that when we die, out bodies began
> to enlarge slowly, and pretty soon we were big, translucent human shapes -- much
> like clouds -- floating in the skies.
That would be nice! It is an end I can look favourably upon :-)
>
> I guess that it would be true in one sense, because the electromagnetic energy
> that our bodies produce (including the EM energy coming from our brains) expands
> outward spherically (more or less). Which star systems are 36 light years away
> from us, anyway? My ever-expanding "sphere" has probably reached them by now ;)
> (Assuming, of course, that the universe is continuous and my EM field hasn't
> encountered problems along the way, not to mention that fact that Sol and its
> subjects don't stay put.)
Taking the idea further, our /clouds/ would seed new stars. Well, that
happens already: we are truly star dust from earlier star generations
and the remains of the solar system will probably disperse and be
incorporated into other clouds.
>
> Oh yeah, real ghosts would look different than they appear in the movies, BTW.
> Real ghosts would probably show veins, organs, bones, etc. But nobody really
> thinks about that, so it's all good :)
Hmmm... I wonder about that. Ghosts being the quintessential parts of a
being, it would only bear the outer shape of it, if at all. No need for
all the internal organs ;-)
Thomas
(Ghosthunter by Royal Privilege)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24-9-2013 19:37, MichaelJF wrote:
> Personally I like the last one most. Really good work Thomas! Will we see it
> stalking Gancaloon?
>
Yes, the last one is strangest.
Gancaloon is famous for its ghosts indeed.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Making a DF3 file from a mesh2 object--> x-axis squeezing
Date: 25 Sep 2013 04:12:51
Message: <52429b03$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
After some tests, I can say that the df3 is squeezed by about 25% along
the x-axis. This happens within the tga2df3.exe application. The
slice-making process is made correctly.
The easy solution is to scale the density file. Gilles Tran tells in his
MakeCloud documentation that the df3 file is generated upside down so
you have to scale <1,-1,1> when used as density file. Now, to compensate
the squeeze, you can replace that by scale <1.25,-1,1>.
Needless to say that this has also consequences for making clouds with
Gilles' macros although the outcome is less obvious to the eyes.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Making a DF3 file from a mesh2 object
Date: 26 Sep 2013 10:04:03
Message: <52443ed3@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Three df3 files for this ghost and x-axis correction.
The pinpoint lights are too strong though.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'gt_df3_test.png' (100 KB)
Preview of image 'gt_df3_test.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> After some tests, I can say that the df3 is squeezed by about 25% along
> the x-axis. This happens within the tga2df3.exe application. The
> slice-making process is made correctly.
>
> The easy solution is to scale the density file. Gilles Tran tells in his
> MakeCloud documentation that the df3 file is generated upside down so
> you have to scale <1,-1,1> when used as density file. Now, to compensate
> the squeeze, you can replace that by scale <1.25,-1,1>.
If it is squeezed 25% it is scaled by 3/4; so shouldn't the correction be
<4/3,-1,1>?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 13-09-26 10:03, Thomas de Groot a écrit :
> Three df3 files for this ghost and x-axis correction.
>
> The pinpoint lights are too strong though.
>
> Thomas
Make them red and a little dimer...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Making a DF3 file from a mesh2 object--> x-axis squeezing
Date: 27 Sep 2013 03:01:40
Message: <52452d54$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26-9-2013 18:06, Cousin Ricky wrote:
>
> If it is squeezed 25% it is scaled by 3/4; so shouldn't the correction be
> <4/3,-1,1>?
Well, forget about the 25% or whatever ;-) The effective correction
(for me at least) is 1.25. Just visual, on a box.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Making a DF3 file from a mesh2 object
Date: 27 Sep 2013 03:56:07
Message: <52453a17@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This seems to be a proper evil ghost :-)
I used a marble density instead of the spherical one.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'gt_df3_test.png' (98 KB)
Preview of image 'gt_df3_test.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 27.09.2013 09:55, schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> This seems to be a proper evil ghost :-)
>
Now I don't get the main theme from Ghost Busters out of my head, that's
scary!
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Making a DF3 file from a mesh2 object
Date: 27 Sep 2013 06:59:27
Message: <5245650f@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27-9-2013 11:19, Ive wrote:
> Am 27.09.2013 09:55, schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>> This seems to be a proper evil ghost :-)
>>
> Now I don't get the main theme from Ghost Busters out of my head, that's
> scary!
You have been cursed my friend.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> This seems to be a proper evil ghost :-)
>
> I used a marble density instead of the spherical one.
>
> Thomas
Wonderful, I would expect crackle would yield good results too.
Best regards,
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Thomas de Groot on date 27/09/2013 9.55 wrote:
> This seems to be a proper evil ghost :-)
>
> I used a marble density instead of the spherical one.
>
> Thomas
This ghost is an evil one... brr!
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
