 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Stephen" <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com> wrote:
> Have you tried to subdivide the mesh in Poseray and change the weld
> tolerance?
No... I'll give it a go, although the Aiko3 mesh is pretty hi-res already!
Might make my PC chug a little. (Tough, that's what it's there for) :)
Bill
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmail com> wrote:
> "Stephen" <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com> wrote:
> > Have you tried to subdivide the mesh in Poseray and change the weld
> > tolerance?
> No... I'll give it a go, although the Aiko3 mesh is pretty hi-res already!
> Might make my PC chug a little. (Tough, that's what it's there for) :)
>
> Bill
emitting media and see if there are any leaks. Then decrease the weld
tolerance to close them up.
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Looks very pretty, though. I think I can imagine how you did the light
outline, because I by myself wrote a scene in pov-ray some thime ago where
I experimented with "x-rays", and that looked similar. I don't know how to
remove the bright pixel dots, because I didn't have this problem. But a
thing that you could do is changing the pose of the left hand a bit,
because it looks strangely twisted. (Ouch!) But all in all, good work :)
Florian
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mild nudity? She's completely transparent! LOL. ;-)
Very pretty though... The middle part doesn't look quite "right". I
think it's the two legs overlapping and making that part extra bright.
Sure, that's physically correct; doesn't mean it will _look_ right...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Right, here's an opaque version. I think this looks better - the body parts
visible through the previous version *were* a little confusing. I'm not
sure if this looks as 'ghostly', though... I think I'll have to see it in
context! Next stop, pose.
Bill
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'ghostgirl2.jpg' (70 KB)
Preview of image 'ghostgirl2.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht
news:web.450f0f35d89b4a7afb2e2dd30@news.povray.org...
> Right, here's an opaque version. I think this looks better - the body
> parts
> visible through the previous version *were* a little confusing. I'm not
> sure if this looks as 'ghostly', though... I think I'll have to see it in
> context! Next stop, pose.
>
Yes, in a sense this looks better. I have some concern about the hair
though, especially in this latest image, as it show too much the 'shell' it
is in fact. Being bald would almost look better, but that would change
totally the context.
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> "Roman Reiner" <lim### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> About her appearence in general, how about making her surface fully
> > transparent and filling her with emitting media instead?
How do you do that? For some reason I thought that mesh2 objects did not
fully support materials, i.e. interior & media.
Joanne
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Joanne Simpson" <cor### [at] onewhiteravencom> wrote:
> How do you do that? For some reason I thought that mesh2 objects did not
> fully support materials, i.e. interior & media.
You can add interior media etc to any mesh, but the results might end up
garbage depending on the nature of the object. If a camera ray only passes
through one surface on the mesh, for example, then the media will appear
saturated. As long as the mesh is a fully closed volume, media should work
fine.
If an inside_vector is added to the mesh def, CSG is also possible (provided
the surface normals are also consistent).
Bill
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> Right, here's an opaque version. I think this looks better - the body parts
> visible through the previous version *were* a little confusing. I'm not
> sure if this looks as 'ghostly', though... I think I'll have to see it in
> context! Next stop, pose.
>
> Bill
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
This is very beautiful. The ethereal effect is very attractive but
before even that is a beautiful feeling of delicacy associated with the
female form. I agree with Thomas that that strong outline of the skull
underneath the hair is distracting. There is some thing of the beauty
of a messotint to this. I remember there is a Japanese artist whose
messotints of female nudes I used to marvel at.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here we go, take 3. I'm much happier with this. The pose looks much more
natural, and the longer hair makes her look more feminine. I've also
increased the brightness of the glow, so the shape of the skull is less
prominent.
Got my Daz/PoseRay/Blender/PoseRay/POV-Ray cycle well practiced now, too...
:)
Bill
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'ghostgirl3.jpg' (134 KB)
Preview of image 'ghostgirl3.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
