 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Following the discussion in povray.off-topic on Physically Based
Rendering (PBR)
http://news.povray.org/povray.off-topic/thread/%3Cop.x0kk32qvufxv4h%40xena%3E/
and the /rules/ given by Clipka, this is an RSoCP following the said
rules and rendered with UberPOV.
Scene file can be found in povray.binaries.scene-files.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'rsocp_uber.png' (273 KB)
Preview of image 'rsocp_uber.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 25.06.2015 um 16:44 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> Following the discussion in povray.off-topic on Physically Based
> Rendering (PBR)
> http://news.povray.org/povray.off-topic/thread/%3Cop.x0kk32qvufxv4h%40xena%3E/
>
>
> and the /rules/ given by Clipka, this is an RSoCP following the said
> rules and rendered with UberPOV.
>
> Scene file can be found in povray.binaries.scene-files.
I think you're doing /something/ wrong there.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 25.06.2015 um 16:44 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> Following the discussion in povray.off-topic on Physically Based
> Rendering (PBR)
> http://news.povray.org/povray.off-topic/thread/%3Cop.x0kk32qvufxv4h%40xena%3E/
>
>
> and the /rules/ given by Clipka, this is an RSoCP following the said
> rules and rendered with UberPOV.
>
> Scene file can be found in povray.binaries.scene-files.
>
Um... you're /not/ following the rules /at all/:
sphere {
<0,0,0>, 1.00
texture {
pigment {srgb <0.8, 0.7, 0.7>*0.5 }
finish {
diffuse albedo 0.8
brilliance 3, 3
reflection {
0.0, 1.0
//roughness 0.001
//fresnel on
//metallic on
}
fresnel on
metallic on
}
}
interior { ior 1.5 }
scale <1,1,1> rotate <0,0,0> translate <0,1.35,0>
}
You're using "metallic on" in the entire finish block, but not in the
reflection block. That's bad bractice. /Very/ bad practice.
Also, "fresnel on" has no effect (or at least shouldn't have) when used
together with "metallic on". And as I'm already at it, always use
"fresnel on" in the reflection block when you use it in the entire
finish block. It doesn't carry through to the reflection automatically.
Furthermore, I'll probably need to add more rules:
- Do not use "diffuse" for metallic materials (or, more specifically,
use "diffuse 0.0" to override the non-zero default). Use specular
reflection with a very high roughness instead. To also add crisper
highlights to the mix, use complex textures.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25-6-2015 22:38, clipka wrote:
> I think you're doing /something/ wrong there.
>
Why am I not surprised? ;-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 25-6-2015 22:50, clipka wrote:
> Am 25.06.2015 um 16:44 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>> Following the discussion in povray.off-topic on Physically Based
>> Rendering (PBR)
>> http://news.povray.org/povray.off-topic/thread/%3Cop.x0kk32qvufxv4h%40xena%3E/
>>
>>
>>
>> and the /rules/ given by Clipka, this is an RSoCP following the said
>> rules and rendered with UberPOV.
>>
>> Scene file can be found in povray.binaries.scene-files.
>>
>
> Um... you're /not/ following the rules /at all/:
>
> sphere {
> <0,0,0>, 1.00
> texture {
> pigment {srgb <0.8, 0.7, 0.7>*0.5 }
> finish {
> diffuse albedo 0.8
> brilliance 3, 3
> reflection {
> 0.0, 1.0
> //roughness 0.001
> //fresnel on
> //metallic on
> }
> fresnel on
> metallic on
> }
> }
> interior { ior 1.5 }
>
> scale <1,1,1> rotate <0,0,0> translate <0,1.35,0>
> }
>
> You're using "metallic on" in the entire finish block, but not in the
> reflection block. That's bad bractice. /Very/ bad practice.
Ah! Yes, I don't know why I switched it off. I had a reason initially
which I have forgotten now :-/
>
> Also, "fresnel on" has no effect (or at least shouldn't have) when used
> together with "metallic on". And as I'm already at it, always use
> "fresnel on" in the reflection block when you use it in the entire
> finish block. It doesn't carry through to the reflection automatically.
I had not paid enough attention to the (mutual) exclusion of fresnel and
metallic (RTFRules!). Forgot also to add conserve_energy.
>
> Furthermore, I'll probably need to add more rules:
>
> - Do not use "diffuse" for metallic materials (or, more specifically,
> use "diffuse 0.0" to override the non-zero default). Use specular
> reflection with a very high roughness instead. To also add crisper
> highlights to the mix, use complex textures.
>
Good one about diffuse and complex textures. My scene is simple because
I wanted to start from the 'basic scene' in the Insert Menu.
Four images are attached with variations in the parameter use (see their
corresponding titles).
sphere {
<0,0,0>, 1.00
texture {
pigment {srgb <0.8, 0.7, 0.7>*0.5 }
finish {
diffuse albedo 0.0
specular albedo 0.5
roughness 0.001
brilliance 3, 3
reflection {
0.0, 1.0
roughness 0.001
fresnel on
metallic off
}
fresnel on
metallic off
}
}
interior { ior 1.5 }
scale <1,1,1> rotate <0,0,0> translate <0,1.35,0>
}
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'rsocp_uber_fresnel.png' (327 KB)
Download 'rsocp_uber_fresnel+specular.png' (317 KB)
Download 'rsocp_uber_metallic.png' (308 KB)
Download 'rsocp_uber_metallic+specular.png' (316 KB)
Preview of image 'rsocp_uber_fresnel.png'
Preview of image 'rsocp_uber_fresnel+specular.png'
Preview of image 'rsocp_uber_metallic.png'
Preview of image 'rsocp_uber_metallic+specular.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 26.06.2015 um 09:40 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> I had not paid enough attention to the (mutual) exclusion of fresnel and
> metallic (RTFRules!). Forgot also to add conserve_energy.
Don't worry, that's only relevant for transparent objects.
> specular albedo 0.5
> roughness 0.001
> brilliance 3, 3
> reflection {
> 0.0, 1.0
Now what did I say about the specular and reflection brightness settings?!
Use "specular albedo N" where N is the same as the maximum reflection.
That's what I said.
Need a hearing aid, hm? :P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26-6-2015 14:43, clipka wrote:
> Am 26.06.2015 um 09:40 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>
>> I had not paid enough attention to the (mutual) exclusion of fresnel and
>> metallic (RTFRules!). Forgot also to add conserve_energy.
>
> Don't worry, that's only relevant for transparent objects.
>
>> specular albedo 0.5
>> roughness 0.001
>> brilliance 3, 3
>> reflection {
>> 0.0, 1.0
>
> Now what did I say about the specular and reflection brightness settings?!
>
> Use "specular albedo N" where N is the same as the maximum reflection.
> That's what I said.
>
> Need a hearing aid, hm? :P
>
What did you say? I don't hear you! ;-)
The thing is, I read what you write and it just doesn't impact where it
should: "Use "specular albedo N" where N is the maximum reflection
intensity"; clear enough one should say, except for me of course.
Oh, well...
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 26.06.2015 um 16:36 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>> Now what did I say about the specular and reflection brightness
>> settings?!
>>
>> Use "specular albedo N" where N is the same as the maximum reflection.
>> That's what I said.
>>
>> Need a hearing aid, hm? :P
>>
>
> What did you say? I don't hear you! ;-)
>
> The thing is, I read what you write and it just doesn't impact where it
> should: "Use "specular albedo N" where N is the maximum reflection
> intensity"; clear enough one should say, except for me of course.
>
> Oh, well...
I'm pondering adding a mode where POV-Ray will automatically issue a
warning whenever it finds inconsistencies in the settings.
I guess I'll start every such warning message with "Thomas, I told
you..." :P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 26-6-2015 17:33, clipka wrote:
> Am 26.06.2015 um 16:36 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>
>>> Now what did I say about the specular and reflection brightness
>>> settings?!
>>>
>>> Use "specular albedo N" where N is the same as the maximum reflection.
>>> That's what I said.
>>>
>>> Need a hearing aid, hm? :P
>>>
>>
>> What did you say? I don't hear you! ;-)
>>
>> The thing is, I read what you write and it just doesn't impact where it
>> should: "Use "specular albedo N" where N is the maximum reflection
>> intensity"; clear enough one should say, except for me of course.
>>
>> Oh, well...
>
> I'm pondering adding a mode where POV-Ray will automatically issue a
> warning whenever it finds inconsistencies in the settings.
>
> I guess I'll start every such warning message with "Thomas, I told
> you..." :P
>
Good idea! ;-)
I have a problem reading from screen. Reason I never use e-books for
example.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 27.06.2015 um 14:12 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>> I'm pondering adding a mode where POV-Ray will automatically issue a
>> warning whenever it finds inconsistencies in the settings.
>>
>> I guess I'll start every such warning message with "Thomas, I told
>> you..." :P
>>
> Good idea! ;-)
>
> I have a problem reading from screen. Reason I never use e-books for
> example.
Then I'll have to make it an audible warning? :P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 26.06.2015 um 09:40 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> diffuse albedo 0.0
> specular albedo 0.5
> roughness 0.001
> brilliance 3, 3
oh, btw, did I mention that brilliance has no effect if diffuse is set
to zero? :P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/06/2015 15:41, clipka wrote:
> Am 26.06.2015 um 09:40 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>
>> diffuse albedo 0.0
>> specular albedo 0.5
>> roughness 0.001
>> brilliance 3, 3
>
> oh, btw, did I mention that brilliance has no effect if diffuse is set
> to zero? :P
>
By the bye. We love the way the documentation is being handled, live. ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 15-06-27 10:41, clipka a écrit :
> Am 26.06.2015 um 09:40 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>
>> diffuse albedo 0.0
>> specular albedo 0.5
>> roughness 0.001
>> brilliance 3, 3
>
> oh, btw, did I mention that brilliance has no effect if diffuse is set
> to zero? :P
>
diffuse 0 mean that no light get diffused. brilliance controll how the
light get diffused. No light diffused = brilliance have no effect.
To me, it's self evident.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27-6-2015 16:18, clipka wrote:
> Am 27.06.2015 um 14:12 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>
>>> I'm pondering adding a mode where POV-Ray will automatically issue a
>>> warning whenever it finds inconsistencies in the settings.
>>>
>>> I guess I'll start every such warning message with "Thomas, I told
>>> you..." :P
>>>
>> Good idea! ;-)
>>
>> I have a problem reading from screen. Reason I never use e-books for
>> example.
>
> Then I'll have to make it an audible warning? :P
>
That would be better; add sirens because I don't hear too well :-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27-6-2015 16:41, clipka wrote:
> Am 26.06.2015 um 09:40 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>
>> diffuse albedo 0.0
>> specular albedo 0.5
>> roughness 0.001
>> brilliance 3, 3
>
> oh, btw, did I mention that brilliance has no effect if diffuse is set
> to zero? :P
>
As a matter of fact, you didn't.
I add it to the rules, as for somebody not familiar with physical
properties this is not evident.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28-6-2015 1:33, Alain wrote:
> Le 15-06-27 10:41, clipka a écrit :
>> Am 26.06.2015 um 09:40 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>>
>>> diffuse albedo 0.0
>>> specular albedo 0.5
>>> roughness 0.001
>>> brilliance 3, 3
>>
>> oh, btw, did I mention that brilliance has no effect if diffuse is set
>> to zero? :P
>>
>
> diffuse 0 mean that no light get diffused. brilliance controll how the
> light get diffused. No light diffused = brilliance have no effect.
> To me, it's self evident.
Not to me. Like many, I am a moron were physical properties are
concerned, hence the need for comprehensive rules. ;-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27-6-2015 17:17, Stephen wrote:
> On 27/06/2015 15:41, clipka wrote:
>> Am 26.06.2015 um 09:40 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>>
>>> diffuse albedo 0.0
>>> specular albedo 0.5
>>> roughness 0.001
>>> brilliance 3, 3
>>
>> oh, btw, did I mention that brilliance has no effect if diffuse is set
>> to zero? :P
>>
>
> By the bye. We love the way the documentation is being handled, live. ;-)
>
You mean like in a boxing ring? :-P
I think the documentation will get better as a result. I am compiling a
document from what Christoph is mumbling about; then I shall let him
read it and shall expect a bucket full of comments :-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/06/2015 07:58, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 27-6-2015 16:18, clipka wrote:
>> Am 27.06.2015 um 14:12 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>>
>>>> I'm pondering adding a mode where POV-Ray will automatically issue a
>>>> warning whenever it finds inconsistencies in the settings.
>>>>
>>>> I guess I'll start every such warning message with "Thomas, I told
>>>> you..." :P
>>>>
>>> Good idea! ;-)
>>>
>>> I have a problem reading from screen. Reason I never use e-books for
>>> example.
>>
>> Then I'll have to make it an audible warning? :P
>>
> That would be better; add sirens because I don't hear too well :-)
>
Blinking text?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/06/2015 08:08, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 27-6-2015 17:17, Stephen wrote:
>>
>> By the bye. We love the way the documentation is being handled, live. ;-)
>>
>
> You mean like in a boxing ring? :-P
>
No, like a dripping tap. One drop at a time. :-)
> I think the documentation will get better as a result. I am compiling a
> document from what Christoph is mumbling about; then I shall let him
> read it and shall expect a bucket full of comments :-)
>
Is Jim Holsenback still looking after the documentation? I've not seen
him post for a while.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 06/28/2015 06:22 AM, Stephen wrote:
> Blinking text?
No, no, NO! I will quit POV-Ray forever if Christoph does that!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 28/06/2015 18:36, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> On 06/28/2015 06:22 AM, Stephen wrote:
>> Blinking text?
>
> No, no, NO! I will quit POV-Ray forever if Christoph does that!
>
Thank you, thank you. :-)
I could only dream of that response. ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 15-06-28 13:36, Cousin Ricky a écrit :
> On 06/28/2015 06:22 AM, Stephen wrote:
>> Blinking text?
>
> No, no, NO! I will quit POV-Ray forever if Christoph does that!
>
OK then. Make it blink for 5 seconds, then use a markee. ;P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Right. This should be it I guess:
//-----------------------------------------------------------------
sphere {
<0,0,0>, 1.00
texture {
pigment {srgb <0.8, 0.7, 0.7>*0.5 }
finish {
diffuse albedo 0.5 //note: should be 0.0 when metallic on
specular albedo 0.4
roughness 0.001
brilliance 3, 3
reflection {
0.0, 0.4
roughness 0.001
fresnel on
metallic off
}
fresnel on
metallic off
conserve_energy
}
}
interior {ior 1.5}
scale <1,1,1> rotate <0,0,0> translate <-1.35, 1.35, 0>
}
sphere {
<0,0,0>, 1.00
texture {
pigment {srgb <0.8, 0.7, 0.7>*0.5 }
finish {
diffuse albedo 0.0 //note: should be 0.0 when metallic on
specular albedo 0.4
roughness 0.001
//brilliance 3, 3
reflection {
0.0, 0.4
roughness 0.001
fresnel off
metallic on
}
fresnel off
metallic on
conserve_energy
}
}
interior {ior 1.5}
scale <1,1,1> rotate <0,0,0> translate <1.35, 1.35, 0>
}
//-----------------------------------------------------------------
As I am still unsure about the looks_like object, in the case of a
/sun-like/ object, this is the code I used although, to tell the truth,
it could be left out in the present scene.
//-----------------------------------------------------------------
#declare SunPosition = <-3000, 3000, -3000>;
//apparent size of the Sun (courtesy Cousin Ricky)
#declare SunDis = vlength(SunPosition)*2/215;
light_source {
SunPosition
color rgb <1, 1, 1>*10
area_light
SunDis*x, SunDis*z,
5, 5
adaptive 2
jitter
circular
orient
parallel
point_at <0, 0, 0>
looks_like {
sphere {
0, SunDis
pigment {color rgb <1,1,1>*10000}
//finish {emission 1}
no_radiosity
no_reflection
}
}
//fade_power 2
//fade_distance SunDis/2
//area_illumination
}
//-----------------------------------------------------------------
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'rsocp_uber.png' (231 KB)
Preview of image 'rsocp_uber.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 28.06.2015 um 23:53 schrieb Alain:
> Le 15-06-28 13:36, Cousin Ricky a écrit :
>> On 06/28/2015 06:22 AM, Stephen wrote:
>>> Blinking text?
>>
>> No, no, NO! I will quit POV-Ray forever if Christoph does that!
>>
>
> OK then. Make it blink for 5 seconds, then use a markee. ;P
I'll use animated GIFs then. A *lot* of them. Mwahahahaha! }:>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 29.06.2015 um 13:35 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> Right. This should be it I guess:
Now look at that! I /love/ the material shown on the left!
Now you need to do something about the plane, because it /really/ breaks
the scene.
> As I am still unsure about the looks_like object, in the case of a
> /sun-like/ object, this is the code I used although, to tell the truth,
> it could be left out in the present scene.
...
> looks_like {
> sphere {
> 0, SunDis
> pigment {color rgb <1,1,1>*10000}
> //finish {emission 1}
> no_radiosity
> no_reflection
> }
> }
With no_radiosity and no_reflection, it's pretty simple: If the sun is
directly visible in the image, use it. If it's only visible in
reflections, you're perfetly fine without the looks_like.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 29-6-2015 15:12, clipka wrote:
> Am 29.06.2015 um 13:35 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>> Right. This should be it I guess:
>
> Now look at that! I /love/ the material shown on the left!
>
> Now you need to do something about the plane, because it /really/ breaks
> the scene.
It does. Maybe I shall do that...
[snip]
> With no_radiosity and no_reflection, it's pretty simple: If the sun is
> directly visible in the image, use it. If it's only visible in
> reflections, you're perfetly fine without the looks_like.
>
You confirm my conclusion :-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 30-6-2015 8:59, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 29-6-2015 15:12, clipka wrote:
>> Am 29.06.2015 um 13:35 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>>> Right. This should be it I guess:
>>
>> Now look at that! I /love/ the material shown on the left!
>>
>> Now you need to do something about the plane, because it /really/ breaks
>> the scene.
>
> It does. Maybe I shall do that...
For instance this.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'rsocp_uber.png' (378 KB)
Preview of image 'rsocp_uber.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 30.06.2015 um 14:06 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> On 30-6-2015 8:59, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 29-6-2015 15:12, clipka wrote:
>>> Am 29.06.2015 um 13:35 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>>>> Right. This should be it I guess:
>>>
>>> Now look at that! I /love/ the material shown on the left!
>>>
>>> Now you need to do something about the plane, because it /really/ breaks
>>> the scene.
>>
>> It does. Maybe I shall do that...
>
> For instance this.
Well, it's a bit of an improvement.
A bit.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/30/2015 1:06 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> For instance this.
Nice! Now replace the plane with a large torus. :-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 30.06.2015 um 17:29 schrieb Stephen:
> On 6/30/2015 1:06 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> For instance this.
>
> Nice! Now replace the plane with a large torus. :-)
You're not planning to make Tom jump through a hoop, are you? ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/30/2015 5:09 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 30.06.2015 um 17:29 schrieb Stephen:
>> On 6/30/2015 1:06 PM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> For instance this.
>>
>> Nice! Now replace the plane with a large torus. :-)
>
> You're not planning to make Tom jump through a hoop, are you? ;)
>
No, I just want a smiley face for a new logo. :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 30-6-2015 14:15, clipka wrote:
> Am 30.06.2015 um 14:06 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>> On 30-6-2015 8:59, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>> On 29-6-2015 15:12, clipka wrote:
>>>> Am 29.06.2015 um 13:35 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>>>>> Right. This should be it I guess:
>>>>
>>>> Now look at that! I /love/ the material shown on the left!
>>>>
>>>> Now you need to do something about the plane, because it /really/
>>>> breaks
>>>> the scene.
>>>
>>> It does. Maybe I shall do that...
>>
>> For instance this.
>
> Well, it's a bit of an improvement.
> A bit.
>
Well, I am not going any further. It is going beyond my initial
experimental intentions and I prefer to turn to other things.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degroot org> wrote:
> Well, I am not going any further. It is going beyond my initial
> experimental intentions and I prefer to turn to other things.
>
> --
> Thomas
It is good to see that you have improved your technique on this topic.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 1-7-2015 13:03, And wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> Well, I am not going any further. It is going beyond my initial
>> experimental intentions and I prefer to turn to other things.
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
> It is good to see that you have improved your technique on this topic.
>
Oh yes! Which does not mean I shall follow it strictly from now on ;-)
I always give priority to artistic licence over real world properties.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 1-7-2015 13:03, And wrote:
> > Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> >> Well, I am not going any further. It is going beyond my initial
> >> experimental intentions and I prefer to turn to other things.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thomas
> >
> > It is good to see that you have improved your technique on this topic.
> >
> Oh yes! Which does not mean I shall follow it strictly from now on ;-)
> I always give priority to artistic licence over real world properties.
>
> --
> Thomas
Hmm, I agree that it is not necessary always following it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2-7-2015 3:10, And wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> On 1-7-2015 13:03, And wrote:
>>> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>>>> Well, I am not going any further. It is going beyond my initial
>>>> experimental intentions and I prefer to turn to other things.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Thomas
>>>
>>> It is good to see that you have improved your technique on this topic.
>>>
>> Oh yes! Which does not mean I shall follow it strictly from now on ;-)
>> I always give priority to artistic licence over real world properties.
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
> Hmm, I agree that it is not necessary always following it.
>
I consider ray-tracing like painting: it is a medium for (artistic)
expression regardless of its life-like possibilities. It also means
however that one needs to know the rules in order to be able to break
them ;-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 2-7-2015 3:10, And wrote:
> > Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> >> On 1-7-2015 13:03, And wrote:
> >>> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> >>>> Well, I am not going any further. It is going beyond my initial
> >>>> experimental intentions and I prefer to turn to other things.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Thomas
> >>>
> >>> It is good to see that you have improved your technique on this topic.
> >>>
> >> Oh yes! Which does not mean I shall follow it strictly from now on ;-)
> >> I always give priority to artistic licence over real world properties.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thomas
> >
> > Hmm, I agree that it is not necessary always following it.
> >
>
> I consider ray-tracing like painting: it is a medium for (artistic)
> expression regardless of its life-like possibilities. It also means
> however that one needs to know the rules in order to be able to break
> them ;-)
>
> --
> Thomas
Sometimes I have the same idea, but it is come to me that even you don't express
it by a realism lighting, you still do something modeling, arrangement, ... in
an usually framework that express a life-like observation.
There are some other drawing style truly. For me, it is important to have the
ability of rendering realism first.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
These are some 'other style' pictures I ever enjoyed and downloaded:
http://yurinoboke.blogspot.tw/2011/01/hourou-musuko-wandering-son-episode-1.html
https://desingersinspiration.wordpress.com/tag/pascal-campion/
http://mclelun.deviantart.com/art/football-field-422808127
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7/2/2015 2:57 PM, And wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> On 2-7-2015 3:10, And wrote:
>>> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>>>> On 1-7-2015 13:03, And wrote:
>>>>> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>>>>>> Well, I am not going any further. It is going beyond my initial
>>>>>> experimental intentions and I prefer to turn to other things.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Thomas
>>>>>
>>>>> It is good to see that you have improved your technique on this topic.
>>>>>
>>>> Oh yes! Which does not mean I shall follow it strictly from now on ;-)
>>>> I always give priority to artistic licence over real world properties.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Thomas
>>>
>>> Hmm, I agree that it is not necessary always following it.
>>>
>>
>> I consider ray-tracing like painting: it is a medium for (artistic)
>> expression regardless of its life-like possibilities. It also means
>> however that one needs to know the rules in order to be able to break
>> them ;-)
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
> Sometimes I have the same idea, but it is come to me that even you don't express
> it by a realism lighting, you still do something modeling, arrangement, ... in
> an usually framework that express a life-like observation.
I think that you are trying to define art. :-)
> There are some other drawing style truly. For me, it is important to have the
> ability of rendering realism first.
>
If you like art. Don't let that become your only goal. If you know what
I mean. :-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2-7-2015 16:28, And wrote:
> These are some 'other style' pictures I ever enjoyed and downloaded:
>
>
> http://yurinoboke.blogspot.tw/2011/01/hourou-musuko-wandering-son-episode-1.html
Indeed. I like this style too.
>
> https://desingersinspiration.wordpress.com/tag/pascal-campion/
> http://mclelun.deviantart.com/art/football-field-422808127
I have less affinity with this I'm afraid.
I am rather traditional in my preferences, as far as realism is concerned:
http://www.abcgallery.com/R/repin/repin.html
http://www.janmankes.nl/
http://www.helmantel.nl/
just to mention a few. Alternatively, I like abstract painting very much ;-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And not to forget photography, like:
http://www.alexandredeschaumes.com/
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 7/2/2015 2:57 PM, And wrote:
> > Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> >>
> >> I consider ray-tracing like painting: it is a medium for (artistic)
> >> expression regardless of its life-like possibilities. It also means
> >> however that one needs to know the rules in order to be able to break
> >> them ;-)
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thomas
> >
> > Sometimes I have the same idea, but it is come to me that even you don't express
> > it by a realism lighting, you still do something modeling, arrangement, ... in
> > an usually framework that express a life-like observation.
>
> I think that you are trying to define art. :-)
>
> > There are some other drawing style truly. For me, it is important to have the
> > ability of rendering realism first.
> >
>
> If you like art. Don't let that become your only goal. If you know what
> I mean. :-)
>
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
Hm, thank you. I'm exploring it. And I would like to know what is my feeling
about art.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 2-7-2015 16:28, And wrote:
> > These are some 'other style' pictures I ever enjoyed and downloaded:
> >
> >
> > http://yurinoboke.blogspot.tw/2011/01/hourou-musuko-wandering-son-episode-1.html
>
> Indeed. I like this style too.
I feel that this author deals with so many emotions, thus he\she can bring a
purely sweet style for us.
>
> >
> > https://desingersinspiration.wordpress.com/tag/pascal-campion/
> > http://mclelun.deviantart.com/art/football-field-422808127
>
> I have less affinity with this I'm afraid.
It's ok. I don't think so much.
>
> I am rather traditional in my preferences, as far as realism is concerned:
> http://www.abcgallery.com/R/repin/repin.html
This makes me recall the art class at high school.
> http://www.janmankes.nl/
> http://www.helmantel.nl/
>
> just to mention a few. Alternatively, I like abstract painting very much ;-)
>
> --
> Thomas
Thanks for the sharing.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7/3/2015 1:43 PM, And wrote:
> Hm, thank you. I'm exploring it.
> And I would like to know what is my feeling about art.
That takes a while and then it changes. ;-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3-7-2015 14:43, And wrote:
>
> Hm, thank you. I'm exploring it. And I would like to know what is my feeling
> about art.
>
Follow your instinct. If you don't like something, leave it for a while
but come back to it later; if you like something, leave it and turn to
something less familiar, more disturbing. To use a hype term: keep out
of your comfort zone.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3-7-2015 19:54, And wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> On 2-7-2015 16:28, And wrote:
>>> These are some 'other style' pictures I ever enjoyed and downloaded:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://yurinoboke.blogspot.tw/2011/01/hourou-musuko-wandering-son-episode-1.html
>>
>> Indeed. I like this style too.
>
> I feel that this author deals with so many emotions, thus he\she can bring a
> purely sweet style for us.
The main problem I have with this though, is that it can drown in pure,
sugar sweet, sentimentalism.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7/4/2015 8:19 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 3-7-2015 19:54, And wrote:
>> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>>> On 2-7-2015 16:28, And wrote:
>>>> These are some 'other style' pictures I ever enjoyed and downloaded:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://yurinoboke.blogspot.tw/2011/01/hourou-musuko-wandering-son-episode-1.html
>>>>
>>>
>>> Indeed. I like this style too.
>>
>> I feel that this author deals with so many emotions, thus he\she can
>> bring a
>> purely sweet style for us.
>
> The main problem I have with this though, is that it can drown in pure,
> sugar sweet, sentimentalism.
>
But to do it with Raytracing?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 7/3/2015 1:43 PM, And wrote:
> > Hm, thank you. I'm exploring it.
> > And I would like to know what is my feeling about art.
>
> That takes a while and then it changes. ;-)
>
> --
>
> Regards
> Stephen
Uh - huh..
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 3-7-2015 14:43, And wrote:
> >
> > Hm, thank you. I'm exploring it. And I would like to know what is my feeling
> > about art.
> >
>
> Follow your instinct. If you don't like something, leave it for a while
> but come back to it later; if you like something, leave it and turn to
> something less familiar, more disturbing. To use a hype term: keep out
> of your comfort zone.
>
> --
> Thomas
Maybe I will think about it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 3-7-2015 19:54, And wrote:
> > Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> >> On 2-7-2015 16:28, And wrote:
> >>> These are some 'other style' pictures I ever enjoyed and downloaded:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> http://yurinoboke.blogspot.tw/2011/01/hourou-musuko-wandering-son-episode-1.html
> >>
> >> Indeed. I like this style too.
> >
> > I feel that this author deals with so many emotions, thus he\she can bring a
> > purely sweet style for us.
>
> The main problem I have with this though, is that it can drown in pure,
> sugar sweet, sentimentalism.
>
> --
> Thomas
I like the sweet..^^"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
