 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Something else: "Wheels At The Waterfront" - the 72' Challenger R/T
tires and rims, modeled over a year ago.
This brand new image shows them exactly as wanted them (based on some
reference images) but back then I did simply give up because both
methods for blurred reflections (large scaled and micro-normals) did
literally last *forever* to render (I know, this is not true, but this
is how I call it when I look at the rendered pixel count and do so again
12 hours later and the number still reads exactly the same).
This was obviously caused by multiple internal reflections inside the
rims and the bad scaling of the blurred reflection methods available for
POV-Ray.
BTW lowering max trace level was/is not an option as the Challenger with
all its fancy chrome, varnish and glass shows otherwise black parts.
I did use, for this image, quite insane and unnecessary high quality
settings for radiosity and area lights just to check the boundaries and
to get a feeling for the quality/time trade-off. Ah, yes, render time
was 3h and 39 minutes.
And yes, I know, the pneus do not look very convincing but I remember
that, a year ago, I did struggle for 2 days with Blender to get them
this far and at the moment I'm not in the mood for that fight again.
So both, blurred reflections and AM3 are IMO a really huge and important
step forward and the adaptive multi-level supersampling does look really
promising given that I actually did fear much longer render times.
And sorry Christoph, no testing from my side on the glare desaturation
as I always render to OpenEXR and prefer my own tool-set for tonemapping
to LDR.
-Ive
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'wheels.jpg' (249 KB)
Preview of image 'wheels.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 21.11.2013 08:53, schrieb Ive:
> This brand new image shows them exactly as wanted them (based on some
> reference images) but back then I did simply give up because both
> methods for blurred reflections (large scaled and micro-normals) did
> literally last *forever* to render (I know, this is not true, but this
> is how I call it when I look at the rendered pixel count and do so again
> 12 hours later and the number still reads exactly the same).
...
> I did use, for this image, quite insane and unnecessary high quality
> settings for radiosity and area lights just to check the boundaries and
> to get a feeling for the quality/time trade-off. Ah, yes, render time
> was 3h and 39 minutes.
High Five!
Looks like I'm doing the right thing then.
> So both, blurred reflections and AM3 are IMO a really huge and important
> step forward and the adaptive multi-level supersampling does look really
> promising given that I actually did fear much longer render times.
Thanks, I really love to hear that.
> And sorry Christoph, no testing from my side on the glare desaturation
> as I always render to OpenEXR and prefer my own tool-set for tonemapping
> to LDR.
No problem, the glare desaturation is not the primary focus of UberPOV
anyway. Just one of those small features that suddenly come to mind, are
implemented in a day or so, and need /some/ incarnation of POV-Ray to
live in. Same as the file_time or plaintext reading features.
The stochastic stuff is really /the/ thing I'm hoping to get exhaustive
test feedback on.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/20/2013 07:27 PM, Ive wrote:
> Am 20.11.2013 19:44, schrieb clipka:
> Used AA settings are +am3 +a0.01 +ac0.995 +r6
> Render time *only* 1 hour 1 minute (and the machine was used to watch
> some YouTube videos of my actual favorite band). Again, not bad after all.
After a couple of false starts here's my offering ... I kept getting a
fatal abort until I backed of the aa depth to +4
For the blurred reflection I used roughness 1e-3 maybe too much ...
smaller roughness less blurring?
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'work.png' (2667 KB)
Preview of image 'work.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 25.11.2013 21:07, schrieb James Holsenback:
> For the blurred reflection I used roughness 1e-3 maybe too much ...
> smaller roughness less blurring?
Yes, just as with specular highlights. In fact the two are meant to match.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 25.11.2013 21:07, schrieb James Holsenback:
> On 11/20/2013 07:27 PM, Ive wrote:
>> Am 20.11.2013 19:44, schrieb clipka:
>> Used AA settings are +am3 +a0.01 +ac0.995 +r6
>> Render time *only* 1 hour 1 minute (and the machine was used to watch
>> some YouTube videos of my actual favorite band). Again, not bad after
>> all.
>
> After a couple of false starts here's my offering ... I kept getting a
> fatal abort until I backed of the aa depth to +4
I like it... although I find the objects troubling. I think they're
planning an invasion...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>James Holsenback on date 25/11/2013 21.07 wrote:
> On 11/20/2013 07:27 PM, Ive wrote:
>> Am 20.11.2013 19:44, schrieb clipka:
>> Used AA settings are +am3 +a0.01 +ac0.995 +r6
>> Render time *only* 1 hour 1 minute (and the machine was used to watch
>> some YouTube videos of my actual favorite band). Again, not bad after
>> all.
>
> After a couple of false starts here's my offering ... I kept getting a
> fatal abort until I backed of the aa depth to +4
>
> For the blurred reflection I used roughness 1e-3 maybe too much ...
> smaller roughness less blurring?
>
Very nice.
The green texture resembles to me the back of a cetonia aurata.
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/26/2013 03:50 AM, Paolo Gibellini wrote:
> >James Holsenback on date 25/11/2013 21.07 wrote:
>> On 11/20/2013 07:27 PM, Ive wrote:
>>> Am 20.11.2013 19:44, schrieb clipka:
>>> Used AA settings are +am3 +a0.01 +ac0.995 +r6
>>> Render time *only* 1 hour 1 minute (and the machine was used to watch
>>> some YouTube videos of my actual favorite band). Again, not bad after
>>> all.
>>
>> After a couple of false starts here's my offering ... I kept getting a
>> fatal abort until I backed of the aa depth to +4
>>
>> For the blurred reflection I used roughness 1e-3 maybe too much ...
>> smaller roughness less blurring?
>>
> Very nice.
> The green texture resembles to me the back of a cetonia aurata.
yes it does! ok ... i'll go ahead and admit i had to ask the oracle
The base pigment /was/ <0.65,0.5,0.25> ... a pretty good looking gold,
but since Ive came up with some nice looking gold I decided to change it
up a bit.
#macro MetalMat (Color)
material {
texture {
pigment { srgb Color*1.5 }
finish {
brilliance 4
diffuse 0
metallic
specular 0.80
roughness 1/40
reflection { srgb Color roughness 1e-5 }
}
}
interior {
ior 1.5
}
}
#end
the calls: MetalMat (<0.65, 0.15, 0.25>) MetalMat (<0.5, 0.65, 0.25>)
MetalMat (<0.25, 0.5, 0.65>)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/25/2013 04:04 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 25.11.2013 21:07, schrieb James Holsenback:
>> On 11/20/2013 07:27 PM, Ive wrote:
>>> Am 20.11.2013 19:44, schrieb clipka:
>>> Used AA settings are +am3 +a0.01 +ac0.995 +r6
>>> Render time *only* 1 hour 1 minute (and the machine was used to watch
>>> some YouTube videos of my actual favorite band). Again, not bad after
>>> all.
>>
>> After a couple of false starts here's my offering ... I kept getting a
>> fatal abort until I backed of the aa depth to +4
>
>
> I like it... although I find the objects troubling. I think they're
> planning an invasion...
>
funny (odd) that my in house critic says they make you wonder what's on
the inside ... trojan horse???
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/25/2013 03:07 PM, James Holsenback wrote:
> On 11/20/2013 07:27 PM, Ive wrote:
>> Am 20.11.2013 19:44, schrieb clipka:
>> Used AA settings are +am3 +a0.01 +ac0.995 +r6
>> Render time *only* 1 hour 1 minute (and the machine was used to watch
>> some YouTube videos of my actual favorite band). Again, not bad after
>> all.
>
> After a couple of false starts here's my offering ... I kept getting a
> fatal abort until I backed of the aa depth to +4
>
> For the blurred reflection I used roughness 1e-3 maybe too much ...
> smaller roughness less blurring?
>
This version is after the fix that allowed me to go to +am3 +r6 (btw:
danke) ... yep I'm impressed with the difference from +r4 to +r6.
I went from roughness 1e-3 to 1e-5 which is about right for this scene
... now you can see some of the other sphere's ... there's 14 of them.
Less blurring in the reflective also gives a better look at the
surroundings.
4 hrs 22 minutes on my clunky old dual core
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'work.png' (2619 KB)
Preview of image 'work.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 27.11.2013 01:56, schrieb James Holsenback:
> I went from roughness 1e-3 to 1e-5 which is about right for this scene
> .... now you can see some of the other sphere's ... there's 14 of them.
> Less blurring in the reflective also gives a better look at the
> surroundings.
I like them better now. More realistic, less worrying. Maybe they're
from this planet after all.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
