"Burki" <nomail@nomail> wrote in message 
news:web.42a587f4a69f2e374f17dd8d0@news.povray.org...
> a normal statement in the camera itself. So the drops are no objects.

This is funny. I knew at first sight that the 1st image posted was probably 
using a camera normal instead of a plane or something between the camera and 
scene. Then when I saw those water drops I thought you redid it by using 
actual droplet objects.

I doubt Wagner, there, was the only other person not realizing this. Nice 
trick.

Bob Hughes

Post a reply to this message

"Bob Hughes" <bob### [at] charternet> wrote:
> This is funny. I knew at first sight that the 1st image posted was probably
> using a camera normal instead of a plane or something between the camera and
> scene. Then when I saw those water drops I thought you redid it by using
> actual droplet objects.
>
> I doubt Wagner, there, was the only other person not realizing this. Nice
> trick.
>
> Bob Hughes

That's what I tought. The first is clearly a normal perturbation on the
camera. Because of the reflections on the main sphere of the second scene,
I tought the drops were real objects...

Wagner

Post a reply to this message

You're fantastic, you know that?!

Man, some day I hope to be this cool...

Post a reply to this message

"Wagner" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "Bob Hughes" <bob### [at] charternet> wrote:
> > This is funny. I knew at first sight that the 1st image posted was probably
> > using a camera normal instead of a plane or something between the camera and
> > scene. Then when I saw those water drops I thought you redid it by using
> > actual droplet objects.
> >
> > I doubt Wagner, there, was the only other person not realizing this. Nice
> > trick.
> >
> > Bob Hughes
>
> That's what I tought. The first is clearly a normal perturbation on the
> camera. Because of the reflections on the main sphere of the second scene,
> I tought the drops were real objects...
>
> Wagner




Hi again,
some time ago, but anyway.
I posted the code for the sphere in the binaries section.
The posting is called "How to drench your monitor"
What I posted is the code for the wet ball, not for the shriek thing. The
latter one consists of 20 superellies that are randomly rescaled and
rotated:

#declare superelli =
superellipsoid {
        <5,5>
        scale 1.7

        texture {mirrrror} // the same texture of the original sphere
                          // I put it into an .inc file
}


#declare rota = seed (42);
#declare scl = seed (43);
#declare i = 0;
#while (i < 20)
        object {
                superelli
                rotate rand (rota) * 360
                scale 1 + (rand (scl) - 0.5) * 0.3
                translate 2*z
        }
#declare i = i + 1;
#end

But this thing needs 10 - 20 min to render!

Yours,
Bu.

Post a reply to this message

Sorry, I meant scene files, not binaries, see

http://news.povray.org/povray.text.scene-files/thread/%3Cweb.42c911577f00d4b1d61e8c370%40news.povray.org%3E/


Yours,
Bu.

Post a reply to this message

"Burki" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Stefan Viljoen <sviljoen@<removethis>polard.com> wrote:
> >
> > Yeah! That's it - see if you remove the magnet maybe the lines start going
> > straight on the checkered plane...
> >
> > :)

I LIKE the image with the wavy checkerboard and the squashed sphere.

Does a magnet on top of a monitor fall into the category of "post-processing
an image"??  :-)

Perhaps you've discovered a completely new CGI technique!

Ken

Post a reply to this message