 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Built entirely in Moray, which is...probably not the way to go, but it's
what I'm familiar with. As I've been working, I've been thinking of a
number of features the next version of Moray (ha ha) could use that'd
make mesh editing an order of magnitude or so smoother, but wishful
thinking etc.
Lot of tuning/refinement to go before I'll be satisfied with it enough
to consider trying to figure out how to best go about rigging it for
posing in another program, or what.
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download '2014-09-28 mermaid.png' (101 KB)
Preview of image '2014-09-28 mermaid.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 29/09/2014 00:14, Tim Cook wrote:
> Built entirely in Moray, which is...probably not the way to go, but it's
> what I'm familiar with. As I've been working, I've been thinking of a
> number of features the next version of Moray (ha ha) could use that'd
> make mesh editing an order of magnitude or so smoother, but wishful
> thinking etc.
>
> Lot of tuning/refinement to go before I'll be satisfied with it enough
> to consider trying to figure out how to best go about rigging it for
> posing in another program, or what.
>
That is impressive built in Moray. How is she made?
Don't hold your breath for the next Moray version.
But there is news that Bishop3D is to be resurrected and the old version
is now Freeware. It works with Pov 3.6 out of the box and with a couple
of tweaks, Pov 3.7
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2014-09-28 19:03, Stephen wrote:
> That is impressive built in Moray. How is she made?
Started out with a cube, split down the middle and deleted one half,
then made a duplicate mesh for the other side, then split a few times
across face and side planes so'd have edge-loops to work with. Extruded
top and bottom in stages, lining up major divisions with front and side
views I'd drawn previously. Didn't add arms and head until had the
general form down. Think I had cross-sectionals in a few places in an
early stage, too, when I was getting general form laid out.
Head is an overlaid Final Fantasy character's face-mesh since I was
making an absolute mess on my own (added each vertex manually to my
model, since can't merge un-subdivided meshes in Moray).
Arms are still very rudimentary blobbish forms, just fit to the top and
front silhouettes.
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Looking good so far. Would recommend Wings3D or Blender for modeling though.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 29-9-2014 1:14, Tim Cook wrote:
> Built entirely in Moray, which is...probably not the way to go, but it's
> what I'm familiar with.
Impressive that you achieved this in Moray. As Jhu mentioned, I would
have attempted this in Wings or Blender, or - in my case - Silo.
Animation would be the next logical step. Any thoughts about that?
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2014-09-29 02:17, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Animation would be the next logical step. Any thoughts about that?
I'd like to get the model rigged and posable when it's adequately done,
but that necessitates getting a nicely-flowing topology that will hold
up to animation (the tail started out as a simply-extruded shape, which
I've started reworking so that the edges follow the musculature)...and
learning how to set up rigging.
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Further progress on my mermaid mesh, dubbed off a copy and rearranged it
some to be posed to show what it could end up being able to do.
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download '2014-10-06 mermaid 1.png' (388 KB)
Preview of image '2014-10-06 mermaid 1.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> Further progress on my mermaid mesh, dubbed off a copy and rearranged it
> some to be posed to show what it could end up being able to do.
>
> --
> Tim Cook
> http://empyrean.sjcook.com
This is looking really good, I like the composition and lighting of the scene.
The hair needs a bit of work still although I guess it would be wet so maybe is
not too far off.
Sean
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Further progress on my mermaid mesh, dubbed off a copy and rearranged it
> some to be posed to show what it could end up being able to do.
>
> --
> Tim Cook
> http://empyrean.sjcook.com
I like that angle a lot better than the original model!
The placement of the fins just seemed ... a bit odd to me, especially the dorsal
fin. I'd be tempted to see how that looks if it were moved up nearer to between
the shoulder blades.
Maybe the ventral fins would be better suited placed mid-"thigh"?
Looking very cool in any event, and it ought to look amazing once some scales
are added, if the fish texture is what you're going for rather than the
dolphin/porpoise route.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6-10-2014 23:10, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> Further progress on my mermaid mesh, dubbed off a copy and rearranged it
>> some to be posed to show what it could end up being able to do.
>>
>> --
>> Tim Cook
>> http://empyrean.sjcook.com
>
> I like that angle a lot better than the original model!
>
> The placement of the fins just seemed ... a bit odd to me, especially the dorsal
> fin. I'd be tempted to see how that looks if it were moved up nearer to between
> the shoulder blades.
> Maybe the ventral fins would be better suited placed mid-"thigh"?
My problem with the current placing is that as far as I know there is no
muscle there that could move the fin. Somewhat higher up one might use a
modified abdominal muscle.
I think if you make a vertebrate it should conform to the body plan of
vertebrates or at least be physiological plausible. That is why I am a
fan of Terryl Whitlatch (and not only because of the extra 'l' at the
end of her first name).
> Looking very cool in any event, and it ought to look amazing once some scales
> are added, if the fish texture is what you're going for rather than the
> dolphin/porpoise route.
The tail indicates that this is definitely not a fish, but a landanimal
readapted to the seas.
Another mild criticism is that she will be the last of the line.
--
Everytime the IT department forbids something that a researcher deems
necessary for her work there will be another hole in the firewall.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 06.10.2014 22:02, schrieb Tim Cook:
> Further progress on my mermaid mesh, dubbed off a copy and rearranged it
> some to be posed to show what it could end up being able to do.
Desktopped!
Say, could you perhaps do me a favor and - for the sake of perfecting
the perfect - do a wider (1920x1200) render of this scene, with
dithering enabled (+th)?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/06/2014 04:02 PM, Tim Cook wrote:
> Further progress on my mermaid mesh, dubbed off a copy and rearranged it
> some to be posed to show what it could end up being able to do.
>
> --
> Tim Cook
> http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Ah! You're headed in a very nice direction - I like this.
Bill P.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2014-10-06 17:53, andrel wrote:
> My problem with the current placing is that as far as I know there is no
> muscle there that could move the fin. Somewhat higher up one might use a
> modified abdominal muscle.
> I think if you make a vertebrate it should conform to the body plan of
> vertebrates or at least be physiological plausible. That is why I am a
> fan of Terryl Whitlatch (and not only because of the extra 'l' at the
> end of her first name).
Structure of this mermaid is directly based on my own dolphin-tailed
mermaid designs (which are more analogous to a centaur, having a two
sets of forelimbs and an extended spine). The placement of the
nearly-vestigal dorsal fin corresponds roughly to that of a dolphin,
while the 'pectoral fins' are morphologically analogous to replacing the
legs of a human at the acetabulum of the pelvis with a dolphin's forelimbs.
references:
http://empyrean.deviantart.com/art/Mermaid-skeleton-105128891
http://empyrean.deviantart.com/art/Mermaid-musculature-136764629
http://empyrean.deviantart.com/art/Mermaid-anatomy-455530950
I had moved the 'pectoral fins' upwards from these drawings so they'd be
a little better-balanced, visually (would work by rotating the 'femur'
upwards, keeping its joints intact, just shifting where the limb exits
the thigh), and made other minor changes as I went, but am trying to
keep to my musculature layout.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2014-10-06 18:21, clipka wrote:
> Say, could you perhaps do me a favor and - for the sake of perfecting
> the perfect - do a wider (1920x1200) render of this scene, with
> dithering enabled (+th)?
Alas, I was fiddling around with lighting and media and so couldn't make
a widescreen render of the previous image, I'm afraid you'll have to
settle for this one (I found a better image for the background, also).
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download '2014-10-06 mermaid.png' (986 KB)
Preview of image '2014-10-06 mermaid.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7-10-2014 4:30, Tim Cook wrote:
> On 2014-10-06 17:53, andrel wrote:
>> My problem with the current placing is that as far as I know there is no
>> muscle there that could move the fin. Somewhat higher up one might use a
>> modified abdominal muscle.
>> I think if you make a vertebrate it should conform to the body plan of
>> vertebrates or at least be physiological plausible. That is why I am a
>> fan of Terryl Whitlatch (and not only because of the extra 'l' at the
>> end of her first name).
>
> Structure of this mermaid is directly based on my own dolphin-tailed
> mermaid designs (which are more analogous to a centaur, having a two
> sets of forelimbs and an extended spine). The placement of the
> nearly-vestigal dorsal fin corresponds roughly to that of a dolphin,
> while the 'pectoral fins' are morphologically analogous to replacing the
> legs of a human at the acetabulum of the pelvis with a dolphin's forelimbs.
>
> references:
> http://empyrean.deviantart.com/art/Mermaid-skeleton-105128891
> http://empyrean.deviantart.com/art/Mermaid-musculature-136764629
> http://empyrean.deviantart.com/art/Mermaid-anatomy-455530950
We do have a few mermaid skeletons in the Vrolik museum.
some are described her, but there may be better sources.
http://thechirurgeonsapprentice.com/2014/09/09/disturbing-disorders-sirenomelia-mermaid-syndrome/
The artist here took a different approach.
> I had moved the 'pectoral fins' upwards from these drawings so they'd be
> a little better-balanced, visually (would work by rotating the 'femur'
> upwards, keeping its joints intact, just shifting where the limb exits
> the thigh), and made other minor changes as I went, but am trying to
> keep to my musculature layout.
Of course you are free to create your own creature but this would not
work anatomically. I you want to have fins that are homologous to the
legs they have to be below the pelvis, otherwise the hip joint won't
work. Nor do I see a reason why they would not work if placed lower.
Hence evolutionary it would also not make sense. IMHO
--
Everytime the IT department forbids something that a researcher deems
necessary for her work there will be another hole in the firewall.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 07.10.2014 08:22, schrieb Tim Cook:
> On 2014-10-06 18:21, clipka wrote:
>> Say, could you perhaps do me a favor and - for the sake of perfecting
>> the perfect - do a wider (1920x1200) render of this scene, with
>> dithering enabled (+th)?
>
> Alas, I was fiddling around with lighting and media and so couldn't make
> a widescreen render of the previous image, I'm afraid you'll have to
> settle for this one (I found a better image for the background, also).
Alas indeed! For when it comes to desktop background, I do prefer the
simpler previous version.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> On 2014-10-06 17:53, andrel wrote:
> > My problem with the current placing is that as far as I know there is no
> > muscle there that could move the fin. Somewhat higher up one might use a
> > modified abdominal muscle.
> > I think if you make a vertebrate it should conform to the body plan of
> > vertebrates or at least be physiological plausible. That is why I am a
> > fan of Terryl Whitlatch (and not only because of the extra 'l' at the
> > end of her first name).
>> The tail indicates that this is definitely not a fish, but a landanimal
readapted to the seas.
Going with the "vestigial dorsal fin" - maybe a modified coccyx, that looks a
bit better in my head - if the plan isn't to use spined vertebrae as a support
for the fin-skin (tm), then maybe just slightly extend the taper of the fin up
the back a bit?
Obviously Tim has his vision for what she is, and I'm no expert in
mer-physiology.
> I had moved the 'pectoral fins' upwards from these drawings so they'd be
> a little better-balanced, visually (would work by rotating the 'femur'
> upwards, keeping its joints intact, just shifting where the limb exits
> the thigh), and made other minor changes as I went, but am trying to
> keep to my musculature layout.
I must confess that I don't quite get what that explanation means - but that's
ok.
IIRC, horses have a way to lock their knees when they sleep - maybe the same
musculature would tie into the leg-fins.
Along the lines of her being an adapted land animal, perhaps it could be
interesting to add a bit more of a suggestive element to show the modified
skeletal structure. Femurs tapering into long, thin tibias, and the foot bones
composing the tail-fin like the fingers bones compose the wings of a bat, with
the tail being the webbing.
Add a flatness or convexity between the femurs to hint at the origin from two
separate legs, or backlight and add some translucency to the flesh.
>> Another mild criticism is that she will be the last of the line.
Well, I suppose that could either be fleshed-out (pun intended) or perhaps there
is some visually well-hidden fold or other covering.
Aaaaanyway - just my mental wanderings on it. You've certainly done a great job
getting her modeled and posing her in a nice looking scene. Looking forward to
seeing where your imagination leads her!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 07/10/2014 17:22, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Along the lines of her being an adapted land animal,
It is a kelpie, for crying out loud. ;-)
It doesn't follow the rules of the blind watchmaker.
The next thing will be people saying that leprechauns wear green.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> The next thing will be people saying that leprechauns wear green.
So true. With all that gold, they most likely wear Armani.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 07/10/2014 20:26, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>
>
>> The next thing will be people saying that leprechauns wear green.
>
> So true. With all that gold, they most likely wear Armani.
>
>
>
Red, It was Mr. Disney or his ilk that made them wear green. ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> ...
> while the 'pectoral fins' are morphologically analogous to replacing the
> legs of a human at the acetabulum of the pelvis with a dolphin's forelimbs.
Shouldn't they be properly called pelvic fins, then?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2014-10-07 22:54, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> ...
>> while the 'pectoral fins' are morphologically analogous to replacing the
>> legs of a human at the acetabulum of the pelvis with a dolphin's forelimbs.
>
> Shouldn't they be properly called pelvic fins, then?
Aye. That's why I put it in quotes. I use the term 'pectoral fin'
purely because their shape and skeletal structure most resembles that
part of a dolphin.
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7-10-2014 23:22, Stephen wrote:
> On 07/10/2014 20:26, Bald Eagle wrote:
>> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The next thing will be people saying that leprechauns wear green.
>>
>> So true. With all that gold, they most likely wear Armani.
>>
>>
>>
> Red, It was Mr. Disney or his ilk that made them wear green. ;-)
>
But only their waistcoats to be sure, are red! And with big silver
buckles on their shoes! And if they want to follow Mr Disney's clothing
advice, it is up to them. :-D
I just happen to read at the moment 'Irish Folk & Fairy Tales' collected
by Michael Scott, and this is how a leprechaun is described in one of
them: "...dressed in a red waistcoat, green jacket, long green hose and
wearing a pair of huge black brogues with enormous silver buckles."
Apart from that, the dress code seems free where hats are concerned
however, but the pipe is mandatory it seems.
Thomas
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 08/10/2014 08:31, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> Red, It was Mr. Disney or his ilk that made them wear green. ;-)
>>
>
> But only their waistcoats to be sure, are red! And with big silver
> buckles on their shoes! And if they want to follow Mr Disney's clothing
> advice, it is up to them. :-D
>
> I just happen to read at the moment 'Irish Folk & Fairy Tales' collected
> by Michael Scott, and this is how a leprechaun is described in one of
> them: "...dressed in a red waistcoat, green jacket, long green hose and
> wearing a pair of huge black brogues with enormous silver buckles."
> Apart from that, the dress code seems free where hats are concerned
> however, but the pipe is mandatory it seems.
Cobblers! ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook wrote on 06/10/2014 22.02:
> Further progress on my mermaid mesh, dubbed off a copy and rearranged it
> some to be posed to show what it could end up being able to do.
>
> --
> Tim Cook
> http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Ethereal and nice: a good shot!
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8-10-2014 10:14, Stephen wrote:
> Cobblers! ;-)
>
And full of mischief... :-)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 08/10/2014 12:14, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 8-10-2014 10:14, Stephen wrote:
>> Cobblers! ;-)
>>
>
> And full of mischief... :-)
>
> Thomas
>
:-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
...now with 81% more UV-mapping! (The hand and innermost surfaces of
the mouth I need to do a bit of rearranging on the texture to include
them properly.)
Done entirely in Moray! (Well, I did a screenshot of the wireframe and
moved things around a bit in an image editor, but the rest of the
process was all done in Moray. Which I can't say I recommend as the
most efficient workflow.)
I still need to do some tweaking of the geometry, but getting the
UV-mapping done was partly to facilitate that, since that's the only way
to colour-code polygons to visually group them.
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download '2014-10-13 mermaid.png' (304 KB)
Preview of image '2014-10-13 mermaid.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 13/10/2014 13:09, Tim Cook wrote:
> Done entirely in Moray!
I am impressed!
And it is pleasing to the eye. :-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
It is an impressive achievement, more so even considering you did it all
in Moray.
Which - by the way - shows the capacities of Moray and its possible
future development.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2014-10-13 09:53, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> It is an impressive achievement, more so even considering you did it all
> in Moray.
I'm not sure if it's stubbornness or laziness that drives me to insist
on sticking with Moray instead of learning one of the major 3D packages
that are infinitely more marketable to know how to use...
> Moray and its possible future development.
One can hope. XD
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> It is an impressive achievement, more so even considering you did it all
> in Moray.
>
> Which - by the way - shows the capacities of Moray and its possible
> future development.
>
> Thomas
Given enough time and effort, anything can be done, as long as it's
theoretically possible. Look what s day can do with just SDL.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Reading this mesh as a mesh2 object in PoseRay, UV-mapped or not, turns
it into gibberish. Un-checking 'export as mesh2' in Moray clears up the
gibberish. This doesn't seem to apply to all mesh2s, just the one I've
spent a great many hours on.
It /renders/ just fine.
*sigh*
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'image1a.png' (107 KB)
Preview of image 'image1a.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
When you get this kind of thing it means that something is not
consistent within the original mesh, congruent faces sharing the same
edges for example, or deprecated triangles. I don't remember if you can
search for them in Moray. In Silo, those things appear as soon as
subdivision is applied. It is then a matter of selecting the offensive
faces and trying to find the construction error.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"jhu" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> Given enough time and effort, anything can be done, as long as it's
> theoretically possible. Look what s day can do with just SDL.
You have guessed at my approach then, the secrent is I have a room with an
infinite number of monkeys and replaced their typewriters with PC's running POV
;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2014-10-15 02:18, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> When you get this kind of thing it means that something is not
> consistent within the original mesh, congruent faces sharing the same
> edges for example, or deprecated triangles. I don't remember if you can
> search for them in Moray. In Silo, those things appear as soon as
> subdivision is applied. It is then a matter of selecting the offensive
> faces and trying to find the construction error.
Strange that it seems to subdivide fine within Moray. Ach.
Ran into a few troubles with texturing it due to subdivision issues with
triangles, was considering rebuilding it after planning out edge loops a
little better. Should go faster second time 'round, eh?
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> On 2014-10-15 02:18, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> > When you get this kind of thing it means that something is not
> > consistent within the original mesh, congruent faces sharing the same
> > edges for example, or deprecated triangles. I don't remember if you can
> > search for them in Moray. In Silo, those things appear as soon as
> > subdivision is applied. It is then a matter of selecting the offensive
> > faces and trying to find the construction error.
You might see if another utility can find and repair any errors in the mesh.
I'm not sure if any of the following will work, but check them out:
Gmsh
netfabb Studio
Mesh Lab
InStep
FreeCAD
Wings3D
Slic3r
Shapeways Mesh Medic
Blender
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"s.day" <s.d### [at] uelacuk> wrote:
> "jhu" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> >
> > Given enough time and effort, anything can be done, as long as it's
> > theoretically possible. Look what s day can do with just SDL.
>
> You have guessed at my approach then, the secrent is I have a room with an
> infinite number of monkeys and replaced their typewriters with PC's running POV
> ;-)
"It was the best of times, it was the... BLURST of times??? You stupid monkey!"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"jhu" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "s.day" <s.d### [at] uelacuk> wrote:
> > "jhu" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> > >
> > > Given enough time and effort, anything can be done, as long as it's
> > > theoretically possible. Look what s day can do with just SDL.
> >
> > You have guessed at my approach then, the secrent is I have a room with an
> > infinite number of monkeys and replaced their typewriters with PC's running POV
> > ;-)
>
> "It was the best of times, it was the... BLURST of times??? You stupid monkey!"
Ha, that is why 10,000 is not enough..
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/15/2014 02:31 PM, jhu wrote:
> "s.day" <s.d### [at] uelacuk> wrote:
>> "jhu" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>>>
>>> Given enough time and effort, anything can be done, as long as it's
>>> theoretically possible. Look what s day can do with just SDL.
>>
>> You have guessed at my approach then, the secrent is I have a room with an
>> infinite number of monkeys and replaced their typewriters with PC's running POV
>> ;-)
>
> "It was the best of times, it was the... BLURST of times??? You stupid monkey!"
>
And of course, the old OLD Bob Newhart routine, monitoring the monkey team...
"To be or not to be, that is the gugorgenplotz..."
-=- Larry -=-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Looks like all mesh2s exported from Moray have this issue. Other
interesting thing about PoseRay is it doesn't seem to like quads in .obj
files much, which is a pity because if you want to go back and forth
between things, it's a nuisance having to re-quadrangulate all the
triangles.
...anyhow, here's a bit more progress on the project. Render time 17 m
26 s in POV 3.7, still entirely done within Moray. Had dumped it out
and was poking around with things in Maya, but I want to show off what
Moray is capable of on its own (well, with some intermediating on the
part of PoseRay to turn the two halves of an unsubdivided mesh into a
single mesh since Moray can't do that for some reason), maybe inspire
code-monkeys to care about its potential fate. ^_^;
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download '2014-11-07 mermaid.png' (1307 KB)
Preview of image '2014-11-07 mermaid.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8-11-2014 1:22, Tim Cook wrote:
> Looks like all mesh2s exported from Moray have this issue. Other
> interesting thing about PoseRay is it doesn't seem to like quads in .obj
> files much, which is a pity because if you want to go back and forth
> between things, it's a nuisance having to re-quadrangulate all the
> triangles.
This is /not/ my experience with Poseray. I model exclusively in
Silo-built quads through .obj files and never got a problem. Poser also
exports as quads with same smooth workflow. So, something else must be
hurting you.
>
> ...anyhow, here's a bit more progress on the project. Render time 17 m
> 26 s in POV 3.7, still entirely done within Moray. Had dumped it out
> and was poking around with things in Maya, but I want to show off what
> Moray is capable of on its own (well, with some intermediating on the
> part of PoseRay to turn the two halves of an unsubdivided mesh into a
> single mesh since Moray can't do that for some reason), maybe inspire
> code-monkeys to care about its potential fate. ^_^;
The results are indeed impressive. A clear signal to the code-monkeys... :-)
[woop?! woop?! woop?!]
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2014-11-08 02:19, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 8-11-2014 1:22, Tim Cook wrote:
>> Looks like all mesh2s exported from Moray have this issue. Other
>> interesting thing about PoseRay is it doesn't seem to like quads in .obj
>> files much, which is a pity because if you want to go back and forth
>> between things, it's a nuisance having to re-quadrangulate all the
>> triangles.
>
> This is /not/ my experience with Poseray. I model exclusively in
> Silo-built quads through .obj files and never got a problem. Poser also
> exports as quads with same smooth workflow. So, something else must be
> hurting you.
Hmm. Could be the way PoseRay handles .udo files and Moray exports .pov
for rendering? Can work with quads /internal/ to Moray, but pulling the
.pov it generates into PoseRay and re-exporting as .udo splits
everything up.
Ah well, I need to go back and do some redesigning on my mermaid and
rebuild it so it has better topology, and improve the mirror-frame and
so forth. End goal is to have something I can rig with a skeleton in
Maya and have a 3D-printing made, though the former needs the mesh to be
absolutely set in stone and I'm not sure if I can manage that with
anything. Always something more to change...
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Just posting this here because it's related and cool.
:)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download '525089_10151112074418297_967043056_n.jpg' (62 KB)
Preview of image '525089_10151112074418297_967043056_n.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2014-11-12 17:41, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Just posting this here because it's related and cool.
How's the carving affect the sound of it, I wonder?
...I need to plan out and figure out how to do hair for my model (as
well as redesigning its topology). Urgh...
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.sjcook.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 08.11.2014 11:01, schrieb Tim Cook:
> On 2014-11-08 02:19, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 8-11-2014 1:22, Tim Cook wrote:
>>> Looks like all mesh2s exported from Moray have this issue. Other
>>> interesting thing about PoseRay is it doesn't seem to like quads in .obj
>>> files much, which is a pity because if you want to go back and forth
>>> between things, it's a nuisance having to re-quadrangulate all the
>>> triangles.
>>
>> This is /not/ my experience with Poseray. I model exclusively in
>> Silo-built quads through .obj files and never got a problem. Poser also
>> exports as quads with same smooth workflow. So, something else must be
>> hurting you.
>
> Hmm. Could be the way PoseRay handles .udo files and Moray exports .pov
> for rendering? Can work with quads /internal/ to Moray, but pulling the
> ..pov it generates into PoseRay and re-exporting as .udo splits
> everything up.
Well, that's no surprise actually: POV-Ray that can't handle quads, so
Moray needs to export them as triangles when exporting to .pov. Of
course, PoseRay stays faithful to the content it reads, making no
attempt to merge the triangles back into quads.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
