Am 09.01.2014 14:18, schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> Far from me the desire to reach the perfection of Master Lipka, so as a
> good disciple I humbly show here my unworthy filth to be judged, kindly
> but justly I hope. :-)

"Master Lipka"? Oh my gosh, what have you imbibed? ;-)

Post a reply to this message

On 9-1-2014 16:28, clipka wrote:
> Am 09.01.2014 14:18, schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>> Far from me the desire to reach the perfection of Master Lipka, so as a
>> good disciple I humbly show here my unworthy filth to be judged, kindly
>> but justly I hope. :-)
>
> "Master Lipka"? Oh my gosh, what have you imbibed? ;-)
>
I am sorry Master! I of course meant High Master!

[abases himself in the mud]

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>
> Certainly.
>
> #declare brown_shapes_tex =
> texture {pigment {color srgbf <0.3959,0.1713,0.1713,1.0>}
> finish{brown_shapes_finish}}

But, this glass. It not glossy!

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:

> Yes indeed. I cannot work as fast as Christoph, especially caustics are
> unfamiliar to me, but I shall try my best. You are free to use the
> images of course.
>
> Thomas

Thanks!

Post a reply to this message

Am 09.01.2014 18:56, schrieb LanuHum:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>>
>> Certainly.
>>
>> #declare brown_shapes_tex =
>> texture {pigment {color srgbf <0.3959,0.1713,0.1713,1.0>}
>> finish{brown_shapes_finish}}
>
> But, this glass. It not glossy!

The glossyness depends on the finish, in this case brown_shapes_finish.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Are you saying that the glass is 
too glossy, or that the glass isn't glossy enough?


Note that I didn't attempt to reproduce the Lux render; the render 
results are so different between all the various renderers anyway that I 
didn't bother.

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>
> The glossyness depends on the finish, in this case brown_shapes_finish.
>
> I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Are you saying that the glass is
> too glossy, or that the glass isn't glossy enough?
>
>
> Note that I didn't attempt to reproduce the Lux render; the render
> results are so different between all the various renderers anyway that I
> didn't bother.

I don't speak about Luxrender
I say that I saw your vase glossy, but opaque as dark porcelain
I adjusted the vase with the rgb parameter, not rgbf
Other result turned out absolutely, and, I didn't find the reason

Post a reply to this message

Hi(gh)!

On 09.01.2014 14:18, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Far from me the desire to reach the perfection of Master Lipka, so as a
> good disciple I humbly show here my unworthy filth to be judged, kindly
> but justly I hope. :-)
>
> I am far from done, so no caustics or other more serious material
> details, neither is the water or the glass sculpture visited here.
>
> I changed the light source to a CIE.inc blackbody of 6200 kelvin and
> doubled the luminosity; I added micro-normals to plaster and tiles. Not
> yet UberPOV but that should come soon too.
>
> Thomas

Still, to me the overall light levels of the shadowed parts seems 
somewhat too low (but this might be a question of my system's gamma - 
currently 2.0)... and there are still some bright artifact dots along 
the upper edges of the walls. What radiosity settings did you use?

See you in Khyberspace!

Yadgar

Now playing: Gustav Mahler: Symphony No. 2, 5th movement, live at 
Masada, conductor: Zubin Mehta

No

Post a reply to this message

> Still, to me the overall light levels of the shadowed parts seems
> somewhat too low (but this might be a question of my system's gamma -
> currently 2.0)... and there are still some bright artifact dots along
> the upper edges of the walls. What radiosity settings did you use?
>

I agree about the light levels but I don't know how to compensate that 
other than by an additional light (I don't like) or by a stronger light 
maybe (I shall try). However, I personally like this and my impression 
is that this is a /natural/ situation. Comments welcome.

The bright dots are still a problem indeed. They are also present in 
Christoph's image. I wonder if this is not light leaking along mesh 
edges.... Comments welcome.

presently, radiosity settings are:

   radiosity {
       pretrace_start   0.08
       pretrace_end     0.004
       count            500, 1000
       nearest_count    10, 5
       error_bound      1
       recursion_limit  4
       low_error_factor 0.3
       gray_threshold   0.0
       minimum_reuse    0.015
       maximum_reuse    0.1		
       brightness       1
       adc_bailout      1/100000
       normal           on
       media            off
       always_sample    off
       //max_sample     1.0
   }

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Am 10.01.2014 09:21, schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> I agree about the light levels but I don't know how to compensate that
> other than by an additional light (I don't like) or by a stronger light
> maybe (I shall try). However, I personally like this and my impression
> is that this is a /natural/ situation. Comments welcome.
>
I think the shadowed parts do look perfectly right.

> The bright dots are still a problem indeed. They are also present in
> Christoph's image. I wonder if this is not light leaking along mesh
> edges....
>
It is light leaking and it gets even worse when using higher quality 
(i.e. lower error_bound) settings. I guess the only solution is to 
remodel the room and give the walls and the ceiling some real thickness, 
thats what I did. As with CSG where it is a good idea to let walls and 
ceiling overlap.


> presently, radiosity settings are:
>
>    radiosity {
>        pretrace_start   0.08
>        pretrace_end     0.004
>        count            500, 1000
>        nearest_count    10, 5
>        error_bound      1
>        recursion_limit  4
>        low_error_factor 0.3
>        gray_threshold   0.0
>        minimum_reuse    0.015
>        maximum_reuse    0.1
>        brightness       1
>        adc_bailout      1/100000
>        normal           on
>        media            off
>        always_sample    off
>        //max_sample     1.0
>    }
>

When you add no_radiosity to all window/door glasses you'll get away 
with 2 recursions and faster render speed - without any visual impact.
And I'm not sure about this low adc_bailout within the radiosity block, 
if such low value is needed shouldn't it go into the global settings 
block itself - to keep the photons visible?
Maybe Christoph can shed some light on this.

-Ive

Post a reply to this message

Just for a quick test I switched off the normals here. I doubled again 
the luminosity and now the shadowy parts come out better.

I wonder if the leaking along the edges cannot be remedied by better 
meshes. The present ones are of very low resolution (a pillar face is 
just two triangles for instance). That might give problems. I am going 
to have the walls through Silo and process them a bit.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test.png' (299 KB)

Preview of image 'test.png'