 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
How was this done using one camera, two primitives, and two single
layered textures?
Oh, and jpeg really didn't like it at all...
Bye for now,
Jamie.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'Pretty_Pattern.jpg' (25 KB)
Preview of image 'Pretty_Pattern.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <MPG.145feb91a867595e98981b@news.povray.org>,
jam### [at] dh70qd u-netcom (Jamie Davison) wrote:
> How was this done using one camera, two primitives, and two single
> layered textures?
Object pattern and/or pigment pattern? Or is it official POV?
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jamie Davison wrote:
> Oh, and jpeg really didn't like it at all...
Indexed png would have been better since there are v few colours.
--
Bye
Pabs
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Oct 2000 10:13:15 +0800, Pabs wrote...
> Jamie Davison wrote:
>
> > Oh, and jpeg really didn't like it at all...
>
> Indexed png would have been better since there are v few colours.
Some people don't like .png's since they have to spawn external viewers.
So I decided to be nice to them and use jpeg :)
Bye for now,
Jamie.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 24 Oct 2000 16:32:44 -0500, Chris Huff wrote...
> In article <MPG.145feb91a867595e98981b@news.povray.org>,
> jam### [at] dh70qdu-netcom (Jamie Davison) wrote:
>
> > How was this done using one camera, two primitives, and two single
> > layered textures?
>
> Object pattern and/or pigment pattern? Or is it official POV?
100% doable in plain vanilla povray 3.1g. I know this because it was
rendered using WinPOV 3.1g <grin>
And you're thinking in far too complex a manner...
Maybe I'll post a different view showing how it was done on the morrow.
Bye for now,
Jamie.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Wolfgang Fluck
Subject: I've got it! (Re: A quick quiz. - Pretty_Pattern.jpg [1/1])
Date: 25 Oct 2000 15:28:17
Message: <39f73451$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jamie Davison <jam### [at] dh70qdu-netcom> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
MPG.145feb91a867595e98981b@news.povray.org...
> How was this done using one camera, two primitives, and two single
> layered textures?
>
> Oh, and jpeg really didn't like it at all...
>
> Bye for now,
> Jamie.
>
It's really quite simple: A perfect reflective cone standing on a checkered
floor, viewed from above.
Proof:
#include "colors.inc"
camera {
orthographic
location <0.0, 10.0, 0.0>
up <0, 0, 2.1>
right <2.1, 0, 0>
look_at <0.0, 0.0, 0.0>
}
cone {
3*y, 0.0,
0*y, 1.0
finish {
reflection 1
}
}
plane { <0, 1, 0>, 0
pigment {
checker White, Black
}
finish {ambient 1}
}
Bye,
Wolfgang
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jamie Davison wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2000 10:13:15 +0800, Pabs wrote...
> > Jamie Davison wrote:
> > Indexed png would have been better since there are v few colours.
> Some people don't like .png's since they have to spawn external viewers.
> So I decided to be nice to them and use jpeg :)
I would have suggested gif if it was not for patent issues.
--
Bye
Pabs
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Oct 2000 18:57:04 +0100, jam### [at] dh70qdu-netcom (Jamie
Davison) wrote:
>Some people don't like .png's since they have to spawn external viewers.
>So I decided to be nice to them and use jpeg :)
I've never really grasped that "display inline" thingy. A good image
viewer can probably do gamma correction, view the image fullscreen
etc. etc. and also supports much more formats (and does so better)
than a browser.
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] usanet
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Oct 2000 21:29:00 +0200, Wolfgang Fluck wrote...
> It's really quite simple: A perfect reflective cone standing on a checkered
> floor, viewed from above.
>
> Proof:
>
> #include "colors.inc"
> camera {
> orthographic
> location <0.0, 10.0, 0.0>
> up <0, 0, 2.1>
> right <2.1, 0, 0>
> look_at <0.0, 0.0, 0.0>
> }
> cone {
> 3*y, 0.0,
> 0*y, 1.0
> finish {
> reflection 1
> }
> }
> plane { <0, 1, 0>, 0
> pigment {
> checker White, Black
> }
> finish {ambient 1}
> }
Correct!
Give that man a chocolate banana :)
The precise numbers on the scaling of the cone are different, but who
cares about that. Oh, and I didn't use an ortho camera.
Bye for now,
Jamie.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
