 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Obviously these are cheap imitations, but I thought I might share
nonetheless...
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'bricks_2015-03-04-1654.jpg' (820 KB)
Preview of image 'bricks_2015-03-04-1654.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymous org> wrote:
> Obviously these are cheap imitations, but I thought I might share
> nonetheless...
Very well done. It looks better than the MODO renders IMO presented by Reuben.
But you left out the transparent tiles.
Best regards,
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/04/2015 01:36 PM, clipka wrote:
> Obviously these are cheap imitations, but I thought I might share
> nonetheless...
>
hey ... nice work with the finish properties!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
That looks amazing. The textures are great. I would love to see the code for
the textures.
Brent
"clipka" wrote in message news:54f750ca@news.povray.org...
Obviously these are cheap imitations, but I thought I might share
nonetheless...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 05.03.2015 um 02:15 schrieb buke9:
> That looks amazing. The textures are great. I would love to see the code
> for the textures.
You'll need UberPOV for this:
------------------------------------------
#declare PlasticSpecularity = 1.0;
#declare PlasticRoughness = 0.001;
#declare PlasticFinish = finish {
emission 0
ambient 0.1
diffuse albedo 0.9
specular albedo PlasticSpecularity roughness PlasticRoughness
fresnel on
reflection { PlasticSpecularity fresnel on roughness PlasticRoughness }
conserve_energy
}
#declare PlasticInterior = interior {
ior 1.5
}
#declare White = material {
texture {
pigment { colour LegoClassicWhite }
finish { PlasticFinish }
}
interior { PlasticInterior }
}
------------------------------------------
Non-white bricks just have different pigments.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Excellent! Thanks!
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Yes Thanks
"Thomas de Groot" wrote in message news:54f8119c$1@news.povray.org...
Excellent! Thanks!
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Obviously these are cheap imitations, but I thought I might share
> nonetheless...
These look great, is that just standard lighting? It looks too good for that to
me but the reflection of the sphere suggests it is.
Sean
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 08.03.2015 um 00:34 schrieb s.day:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>> Obviously these are cheap imitations, but I thought I might share
>> nonetheless...
>
> These look great, is that just standard lighting? It looks too good for that to
> me but the reflection of the sphere suggests it is.
No image-based lighting involved, if that's what you mean - just a large
area light and a simple sky sphere. It does, however, make use of
UberPOV's uncached radiosity and blurred reflections.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 08.03.2015 um 00:34 schrieb s.day:
> > clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> >> Obviously these are cheap imitations, but I thought I might share
> >> nonetheless...
> >
> > These look great, is that just standard lighting? It looks too good for that to
> > me but the reflection of the sphere suggests it is.
>
> No image-based lighting involved, if that's what you mean - just a large
> area light and a simple sky sphere. It does, however, make use of
> UberPOV's uncached radiosity and blurred reflections.
"uncached radiosity" ?
is that just progressive rendering?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/03/2015 5:36 AM, clipka wrote:
> Obviously these are cheap imitations, but I thought I might share
> nonetheless...
>
Wow. Excellent finish for this sort of render. Not totally like the
real thing but sort of 'hyper real'. Low it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 03/08/2015 06:48 AM, Mr wrote:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>> Am 08.03.2015 um 00:34 schrieb s.day:
>>> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>>>> Obviously these are cheap imitations, but I thought I might share
>>>> nonetheless...
>>>
>>> These look great, is that just standard lighting? It looks too good for that to
>>> me but the reflection of the sphere suggests it is.
>>
>> No image-based lighting involved, if that's what you mean - just a large
>> area light and a simple sky sphere. It does, however, make use of
>> UberPOV's uncached radiosity and blurred reflections.
>
> "uncached radiosity" ?
>
> is that just progressive rendering?
>
from changes.txt:
Unbiased Diffuse Illumination:
------------------------------
- UberPOV allows to disable the caching of radiosity samples, by
using the
following syntax in the global radiosity block:
no_cache [BOOL]
It also changes the way the secondary ray directions are chosen, and
effectively turns the radiosity algorithm into a purely stochastic
unbiased
algorithm to compute diffuse illumination.
Most radiosity settings are without effect in this mode, except for the
following:
adc_bailout FLOAT
brightness FLOAT
brilliance BOOL
count FLOAT
gray_threshold FLOAT
media BOOL
normal BOOL
recursion_limit INT
subsurface BOOL
The current implementation does not translate classic radiosity
settings
into useful parameters for this mode of operation; it is therefore
highly
recommended to use a much lower setting for the "count" parameter than
typical with standard radiosity.
This syntax extension can be tested for using the #patch directive or
patch() function with the patch name "upov-radiosity-no_cache"; the
current
implementation is version 0.1.
from revision.txt
-----------------
Commit 21cc3c6 on 2014-07-24 by Christoph Lipka
Add support for stochastic diffuse computations.
Specifying `no_cache` in the global radiosity block will disable
caching of radiosity samples,
and use a more random algorithm to generate secondary ray
directions, effectively using the
radiosity code for straightforward stochastic computation of
diffuse illumination.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This looks great.
I posted a link to this thread onto the LDraw forums and it has generated
some further comments:
http://forums.ldraw.org/read.php?20,14335,16426#msg-16426
I've tried doing some renders with UberPov using your suggested Plastic
finish settings, but I can't seem to get the same kind of result that you've
achieved (maybe it's the focul blur that I'm missing).
I would like try some more UberPov renders using the LDraw models that I've
already converted to POV-Ray - could you share the full code for your
example picture.
BTW - I couldn't get the latest version of UberPov to work - it kept
crashing (I'm using 64-bit Windows 8)
Reuben
"clipka" <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote in message
news:54f750ca@news.povray.org...
> Obviously these are cheap imitations, but I thought I might share
> nonetheless...
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 04.06.2015 um 23:17 schrieb Reuben Pearse:
> I would like try some more UberPov renders using the LDraw models that I've
> already converted to POV-Ray - could you share the full code for your
> example picture.
See povray.binary.scene-files.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 05.06.2015 um 23:39 schrieb clipka:
> Am 04.06.2015 um 23:17 schrieb Reuben Pearse:
>
>> I would like try some more UberPov renders using the LDraw models that
>> I've
>> already converted to POV-Ray - could you share the full code for your
>> example picture.
>
> See povray.binary.scene-files.
Sorry: povray.binaries.scene-files.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I created an image using most of your settings as well as the LGEO part
library. I am not as impressed however. I guess from a distance the
details are not as noticeable.
Michael
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'building_007_firecompany_uber_04.png' (2155 KB)
Preview of image 'building_007_firecompany_uber_04.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 20.09.2015 um 04:30 schrieb Mike Horvath:
> I created an image using most of your settings as well as the LGEO part
> library. I am not as impressed however. I guess from a distance the
> details are not as noticeable.
My guess is that it wants more stuff around it. Doesn't have to be LEGO
bricks - maybe a HDR light probe mapped to the sky might already do the
trick.
In my scene, the camera is far enough "inside" the scene that the
various elements mutually serve as environment. In your scene, the
camera is way outside the building, and there's nothing besides.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/19/2015 10:30 PM, Mike Horvath wrote:
> I created an image using most of your settings as well as the LGEO part
> library. I am not as impressed however. I guess from a distance the
> details are not as noticeable.
>
> Michael
Tried again with a plain white background. The shadows look pretty filthy.
Michael
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'l3p_building_007_firecompany_uber_05.png' (675 KB)
Preview of image 'l3p_building_007_firecompany_uber_05.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 22.09.2015 um 13:16 schrieb Mike Horvath:
> On 9/19/2015 10:30 PM, Mike Horvath wrote:
>> I created an image using most of your settings as well as the LGEO part
>> library. I am not as impressed however. I guess from a distance the
>> details are not as noticeable.
>>
>> Michael
>
> Tried again with a plain white background. The shadows look pretty filthy.
Technically that doesn't seem to be the shadows, but the radiosity.
Are you sure you're using UberPOV's "no_cache" keyword in the radiosity
settings?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/22/2015 10:23 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 22.09.2015 um 13:16 schrieb Mike Horvath:
>> On 9/19/2015 10:30 PM, Mike Horvath wrote:
>>> I created an image using most of your settings as well as the LGEO part
>>> library. I am not as impressed however. I guess from a distance the
>>> details are not as noticeable.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>
>> Tried again with a plain white background. The shadows look pretty filthy.
>
> Technically that doesn't seem to be the shadows, but the radiosity.
>
> Are you sure you're using UberPOV's "no_cache" keyword in the radiosity
> settings?
>
I used your radiosity settings exactly, and it does look better. Except
for the grainy speckles in the shadowed regions where radiosity is working.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'l3p_building_021_houseporchyard_uber_01.png' (1187 KB)
Preview of image 'l3p_building_021_houseporchyard_uber_01.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 24.09.2015 um 08:23 schrieb Mike Horvath:
>>> Tried again with a plain white background. The shadows look pretty
>>> filthy.
>>
>> Technically that doesn't seem to be the shadows, but the radiosity.
>>
>> Are you sure you're using UberPOV's "no_cache" keyword in the radiosity
>> settings?
>
> I used your radiosity settings exactly, and it does look better. Except
> for the grainy speckles in the shadowed regions where radiosity is working.
See? Just listen to old people's advice ;)
As for the grainy speckles, those have the pleasant property that they
can be reduced simply by throwing more computing time at it. UberPOV's
anti-aliasing mode 3 is your friend there.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Horvath <mik### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I used your radiosity settings exactly, and it does look better. Except
> for the grainy speckles in the shadowed regions where radiosity is working.
What is that device attached to the attic roof on the right end?
;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/24/2015 5:28 PM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> Mike Horvath <mik### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> I used your radiosity settings exactly, and it does look better. Except
>> for the grainy speckles in the shadowed regions where radiosity is working.
>
> What is that device attached to the attic roof on the right end?
>
> ;-)
>
>
Well, young man. In the days before satellites... :-P
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 9/24/2015 11:51 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 24.09.2015 um 08:23 schrieb Mike Horvath:
>
>>>> Tried again with a plain white background. The shadows look pretty
>>>> filthy.
>>>
>>> Technically that doesn't seem to be the shadows, but the radiosity.
>>>
>>> Are you sure you're using UberPOV's "no_cache" keyword in the radiosity
>>> settings?
>>
>> I used your radiosity settings exactly, and it does look better. Except
>> for the grainy speckles in the shadowed regions where radiosity is working.
>
> See? Just listen to old people's advice ;)
>
> As for the grainy speckles, those have the pleasant property that they
> can be reduced simply by throwing more computing time at it. UberPOV's
> anti-aliasing mode 3 is your friend there.
>
I do not have this time, unfortunately. I have about a hundred models,
and each render is taking me 16+ hours.
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Horvath <mik### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
keep at it mikey,
:)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'legospace_phtons.png' (337 KB)
Preview of image 'legospace_phtons.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hi(gh)!
On 19.11.2015 19:13, Melody wrote:
> Mike Horvath <mik### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>
>
> keep at it mikey,
> :)
>
This very set I had when I was 10 years old, back in 1979! And also the
LL 918, and, somewhat later, the LL 928 (my younger brother had the LL 924)!
See you in Khyberspace!
Yadgar
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 26.11.2015 um 19:32 schrieb Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann:
> Hi(gh)!
>
> On 19.11.2015 19:13, Melody wrote:
>> Mike Horvath <mik### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>>
>>
>> keep at it mikey,
>> :)
>>
> This very set I had when I was 10 years old, back in 1979! And also the
> LL 918, and, somewhat later, the LL 928 (my younger brother had the LL
> 924)!
Interestingly enough, 891 (442 in the US) was one of just two sets from
the European 1979 generation of space series my brother and I did /not/
own (not counting baseplate sets).
My very first classic space set was the 889 radar vehicle; from that day
on, the percentage of non-space sets among our subsequent new
acquisitions dropped to almost zero, and never recovered.
LL 928 will probably always be my favorite LEGO space set, rivaled only
by 6929 (which we never owned).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
