Martin Magnusson wrote:
> This is doubtlessly the best landscape I have ever seen done with POV.

I am not sure if it really deserves this but thanks anyway.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 03 May. 2005 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

Dave Matthews wrote:
> 
> Stunning.  Before you become too critical about the background 
> mountains, they remind me of Agathla Peak, back in my old stomping 
> grounds on the Navajo Nation:
> 
> http://www.lapahie.com/Pictures/Agathla_Peak_Fm_Church_Rock.jpg
> 
> I believe that the texture might be a bit different, since these are 
> eroded remnants of volcanoes (if I recall correctly), but the geometry 
> is similar.

Yes, but surely not as high as in my scene.  I have already made some 
tests with changed background and will see what fits best.

> Anyway, I should echo Jim Charter's comments, especially:
> 
> "I feel quite ridiculous making suggestions."
> 
> Fantastic, Christoph!

Thanks.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 03 May. 2005 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

James Buddenhagen wrote:
> Wonderful picture!
> 
> Some comments:  The clouds are not a problem for me.  They would be unusual in
> the desert
> but often there are clouds in the desert, see photos taken in the southwest of
> USA
> I attached for comparison. The moutain on the far left doesn't seem realistic
> to me, and seems a bit too faded out. (On the other hand, Shiprock New Mexico
> looks a
> bit like that mountain, and it doesn't look real when you see it in person!).

Thanks for the reference pictures.  Note this is not really the type of 
clouds i am aiming at - it is more the instable, windy weather type - 
see for example:

http://www.wolkenatlas.de/wolken/wo05902.htm

> 
> But don't change it too much.  In my opinion composition is just as important,
> if not
> more important, than realism.

Yes, but it is interesting to test variations and see how changing 
individual things changes the overall impression.  Often the first 
version is stays the best of course.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 03 May. 2005 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

I love the foreground! (It's often also the weak point in my own
landscapes.)

Regarding the mountains in the background, the vertical scaling looks
excessive. The realisim of traditional 1/f fractal noise as terrain starts
to break down at a width to hight scaling ratio of about 1:0.12. At least
to my eyes.

After reading some of the comments on the clouds I would observe, that if
there is a fault, it is in the color of the shadows which appear rather
flat and gray without capturing any of the blue sky color (ref the photos
posted earlier). There is also the curious instance where the the contrast
of the clouds appears to _increase_ with distance which is generally
contrary to the normal depth cue.

Abe

Post a reply to this message

Christoph Hormann wrote:

> 
> I hope you are aware that placement of bushes and grass is random - i 
> merely select a version of randomness i find most appealing (you can of 
> course argue that this is not so much different from actually placing 
> things manually).
> 
I wasn't totally sure.  Sometimes people combine random with a test 
against a pigment pattern to exclude certain areas, or one can 
manipulate the density or other aspects of the random placement in 
general ways.  I think you use collision detection with your bushes do 
you not?  So I was curious if the grass tufts were being placed with 
some degree of control.  I knew any imposed control would be algorithmic 
not manual of course ;)

Post a reply to this message

<coming in late, panting>

Excellent indeed!
Mountains should show sharper erosion, I think

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Christoph Hormann wrote:
> Also the first serious render i did on my new computer, less than two
>  days for ~7000x5000.

   I don't know what's more impressive, your lotw images or your patience
developing them...

> I am not yet satisfied with the background mountains (they don't seem
>  very realistic) so i consider changing them.

   As others pointed, the left mountains look too "heightfieldish". As
for the clouds, they seem perhaps a bit too soft, but are very credible
at first impression.

   BTW, your landscapes look a lot like south-east spain... I keep
thinking on Almeria every time I see any of them. :)

--
Jaime

Post a reply to this message

Jim Charter wrote:
> I wasn't totally sure.  Sometimes people combine random with a test 
> against a pigment pattern to exclude certain areas, or one can 
> manipulate the density or other aspects of the random placement in 
> general ways.  I think you use collision detection with your bushes do 
> you not?  So I was curious if the grass tufts were being placed with 
> some degree of control.  I knew any imposed control would be algorithmic 
> not manual of course ;)

Actually there is  such a function controlling the placement but i did 
not touch it here - just took what randomness (in the LOTW system) 
choose for me in this case. ;-)

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 03 May. 2005 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:
> 
>   I don't know what's more impressive, your lotw images or your patience
> developing them...

The LOTW itself is really not much work - i just need to find the time 
to run it every week...

But i have the impression that although there is some new interesting 
scene every week the bandwidth of possible combinations is somewhat 
exhausted meanwhile.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 03 May. 2005 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message