Well, at least the first image I am willing to show.  It is basically a
tribute to Ruth Bernhard, a German born photographer who did the famous
"Lifesavers" image.  She passed away last October and the obituary in the
San Fransico Chronicle gave me this idea.  So, if you are into binary codes
you can probably read the simple message.

My final image resolution was 3,000 by 2,400 and took 49 hours to render on
a 3GHz MacPro running MegaPOV.   The excessive time was due to focal blur,
HQ indoor radiosity with a sky sphere and two light sources.   Many thanks

a great tool!

-Allan

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'small-ls.jpg' (94 KB)

Preview of image 'small-ls.jpg'

Since I have not seen any replies to my posting I thought I'd do a test
reply.  Gee, was my image that bad?

-Allan
allan <at> WholeCheese <dot> com

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 14:22:28 EDT, "Allan" <all### [at] WholeCheesecom> wrote:

>Since I have not seen any replies to my posting I thought I'd do a test
>reply.  Gee, was my image that bad?
>
>-Allan
>allan <at> WholeCheese <dot> com
>
>
No it's not that bad but it has been added to a 2005 thread so it's been
overlooked.
I'm glad you posted again because I like this. IIRC the original had bigger
shadows but this is better than the original IMHO.

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen,

Thank you for the reply and kind words!

> No it's not that bad but it has been added to a 2005 thread so it's been
> overlooked.

Not sure how it was added to a 2005 thread.  Do computers make mistakes?
:-)


> I'm glad you posted again because I like this. IIRC the original had bigger
> shadows but this is better than the original IMHO.

IMHO the original is better because it was an original idea.  You can see
the original photograph here:

http://www.soulcatcherstudio.com/exhibitions/bernhard_99th/lifesavers.html

My shadows are about the same size and angle but my "camera" is slightly
lower so that I can get more Lifesavers in the view.  I am not satisfied
with the texture of my plain, too smooth and not enough contrast variation.

I plan on posting the source and a link to the 3000x2400 pixel version after
I twiddle with it some more.

-Allan
allan <at> WholeCheese <dot> com

Post a reply to this message

Allan nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 19-04-2007 17:49:
> Stephen,

> Thank you for the reply and kind words!

>> No it's not that bad but it has been added to a 2005 thread so it's been
>> overlooked.

> Not sure how it was added to a 2005 thread.  Do computers make mistakes?
> :-)


>> I'm glad you posted again because I like this. IIRC the original had bigger
>> shadows but this is better than the original IMHO.

> IMHO the original is better because it was an original idea.  You can see
> the original photograph here:

> http://www.soulcatcherstudio.com/exhibitions/bernhard_99th/lifesavers.html

> My shadows are about the same size and angle but my "camera" is slightly
> lower so that I can get more Lifesavers in the view.  I am not satisfied
> with the texture of my plain, too smooth and not enough contrast variation.

> I plan on posting the source and a link to the 3000x2400 pixel version after
> I twiddle with it some more.

> -Allan
> allan <at> WholeCheese <dot> com
If you want to increase contrast, set ambient to 0 and diffuse to 1. Also, to 
beter emulate the original, you should use radiosity, add radiosity{} in the 
global_settings section to enable radiosity with default parameters. Looking at 
the original, you'd probably will need to increase count and reduce error_bound.

-- 
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
Coming soon: Windows for Nintendo!

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:49:09 EDT, "Allan" <all### [at] WholeCheesecom> wrote:

>
>Thank you for the reply and kind words!
>

I was waiting for someone to reply so I could find it again.

>> No it's not that bad but it has been added to a 2005 thread so it's been
>> overlooked.
>
>Not sure how it was added to a 2005 thread.  Do computers make mistakes?
>:-)

No, but when there is an ambiguity the result is often not what you expect. In
this case the subject is the same "My first post" so my news reader appended
your post to the original.

>> I'm glad you posted again because I like this. IIRC the original had bigger
>> shadows but this is better than the original IMHO.
>
>IMHO the original is better because it was an original idea.  You can see
>the original photograph here:
>
>http://www.soulcatcherstudio.com/exhibitions/bernhard_99th/lifesavers.html
>
>My shadows are about the same size and angle but my "camera" is slightly
>lower so that I can get more Lifesavers in the view.  I am not satisfied
>with the texture of my plain, too smooth and not enough contrast variation.

Add some, or increase the plane normals. See Warp's excellent tutorial
http://warp.povusers.org/povtips/

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message