 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"nemesis" <nam### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> nice! but what really spoils is the fact that the normals on the wall are not
> visible under the flat shadows. You'll learn in time all the craze behing
> Global Illumination that took the CG world by storm... available in povray as
> radiosity...
>
Thanks! Yeah, I didn't spend much time on the scene as compared to the models
themselves. I like what can be done with radiosity, but most of my experience
with it has been about as enjoyable painting a house with my eyelashes.
> yes, in real life there's always some glueing material between sharp edges or
> some non-linear, assymetric distortions... very hard on SDL, specially with
> functions and isosurfaces...
>
> I wish there could be a way to do straightforward CSG with primitive shapes and
> specify some glueing threshold...
I noticed that IsoCSG looks to be able to blob any shape together. I haven't
really tried it out yet, but it looks quite interesting.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Chris B" <nom### [at] nomailcom> wrote:
> Hi,
> Very nice. I think those models are extremely well done.
>
> Regards,
> Chris B.
>
> p.s. Any of them would make a very nice addition to the object collection we
> started last year at http://lib.povray.org, if you're interested.
Thanks very much! I'd be happy to submit these, though I'm wondering if there
are any copyright issues as they are modeled on real products (the blocks also
use the actual patterns as well.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Blue Herring" <bhe### [at] tinfoilcatcom> wrote:
> I like what can be done with radiosity, but most of my experience
> with it has been about as enjoyable painting a house with my eyelashes.
but if it's old experience, remember the hardware back then wasn't up to the
task...
> > I wish there could be a way to do straightforward CSG with primitive shapes and
> > specify some glueing threshold...
>
> I noticed that IsoCSG looks to be able to blob any shape together. I haven't
> really tried it out yet, but it looks quite interesting.
yes, Christoph Hormann has lots of goodies in his site. But I wish it was
syntax rather than kinda clumsy macro calls. Or wouldn't it be nice to specify
isosurfaces with primitive object syntax too rather than just with functions?
it should be so much easier to write:
isosurface {
union {
cylinder { -y,y .2 bend_with spline_foo }
cylinder { -x,x .2 }
glue_threshold .1
}
}
rather than the cryptic function equations or macro calls...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Blue Herring" <bhe### [at] tinfoilcatcom> wrote in message
news:web.477e49577e3e9c5cce5ce3790@news.povray.org...
> "Chris B" <nom### [at] nomailcom> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Very nice. I think those models are extremely well done.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Chris B.
>>
>> p.s. Any of them would make a very nice addition to the object collection
>> we
>> started last year at http://lib.povray.org, if you're interested.
>
> Thanks very much! I'd be happy to submit these, though I'm wondering if
> there
> are any copyright issues as they are modeled on real products (the blocks
> also
> use the actual patterns as well.)
>
Ah yes. This has been discussed before, (about a desk if I remember
correctly) and the conclusion there seemed to be that if it bore
characteristics unique to a particular manufacturers version of the item (or
a trademark) that there could well be issues in copying the item.
I recall wondering whether this really applied to a 3D representation of the
object any more than to a 2D representation of the object, such as a photo,
a rendering or technical drawings, but I am not a lawyer and have to admit
to still being totally unclear about whether there's anything wrong with
distributing 3D models of real world objects.
Best Regards,
Chris B.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Chris B" <nom### [at] nomailcom> wrote:
> I recall wondering whether this really applied to a 3D representation of the
> object any more than to a 2D representation of the object, such as a photo,
> a rendering or technical drawings, but I am not a lawyer and have to admit
> to still being totally unclear about whether there's anything wrong with
> distributing 3D models of real world objects.
come on! There's so many 3D polygonal models of known cars out there in many
sites for free! If the automobile industry doesn't sue everybody how can
furniture makers attempt to?...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chris B nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2008/01/04 10:51:
> "Blue Herring" <bhe### [at] tinfoilcatcom> wrote in message
> news:web.477e49577e3e9c5cce5ce3790@news.povray.org...
>> "Chris B" <nom### [at] nomailcom> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Very nice. I think those models are extremely well done.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Chris B.
>>>
>>> p.s. Any of them would make a very nice addition to the object collection
>>> we
>>> started last year at http://lib.povray.org, if you're interested.
>> Thanks very much! I'd be happy to submit these, though I'm wondering if
>> there
>> are any copyright issues as they are modeled on real products (the blocks
>> also
>> use the actual patterns as well.)
>>
>
> Ah yes. This has been discussed before, (about a desk if I remember
> correctly) and the conclusion there seemed to be that if it bore
> characteristics unique to a particular manufacturers version of the item (or
> a trademark) that there could well be issues in copying the item.
>
> I recall wondering whether this really applied to a 3D representation of the
> object any more than to a 2D representation of the object, such as a photo,
> a rendering or technical drawings, but I am not a lawyer and have to admit
> to still being totally unclear about whether there's anything wrong with
> distributing 3D models of real world objects.
>
> Best Regards,
> Chris B.
>
>
You could send an e-mail to the maker(s) and ask them if they agree about what
you want to do.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
You know you've been raytracing too long when you start wishing you were
actually in that futuristic mandelbrotian landscape you just rendered.
-- fish-head
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
As far as I understand, artistic interpretations of trademarked products
is not a problem, at least if you're not selling the thing. If you're
selling something, there might be issues. I wouldn't worry.
In a sane world, if there were a problem the trademark holder could
simply ask for the image (etc) to be removed and you could comply, but
these days, companies seem to like the jack-booted lawyer mentality to
the civilized way of doing things. YMMV.
Chris B wrote:
> "Blue Herring" <bhe### [at] tinfoilcatcom> wrote in message
> news:web.477e49577e3e9c5cce5ce3790@news.povray.org...
>> "Chris B" <nom### [at] nomailcom> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Very nice. I think those models are extremely well done.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Chris B.
>>>
>>> p.s. Any of them would make a very nice addition to the object collection
>>> we
>>> started last year at http://lib.povray.org, if you're interested.
>> Thanks very much! I'd be happy to submit these, though I'm wondering if
>> there
>> are any copyright issues as they are modeled on real products (the blocks
>> also
>> use the actual patterns as well.)
>>
>
> Ah yes. This has been discussed before, (about a desk if I remember
> correctly) and the conclusion there seemed to be that if it bore
> characteristics unique to a particular manufacturers version of the item (or
> a trademark) that there could well be issues in copying the item.
>
> I recall wondering whether this really applied to a 3D representation of the
> object any more than to a 2D representation of the object, such as a photo,
> a rendering or technical drawings, but I am not a lawyer and have to admit
> to still being totally unclear about whether there's anything wrong with
> distributing 3D models of real world objects.
>
> Best Regards,
> Chris B.
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/toronto/archive/2007/10/05/city-outraged-over-mint-fee-for-one-cent-campaign.a
spx
An interesting little incident up here last year regarding the Canadian Mint and
the City of Toronto's use of a penny image in some campaign advertisements, yep
the world certainly is crazy...
-tgq
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Trevor G Quayle nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2008/01/09 11:10:
>
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/toronto/archive/2007/10/05/city-outraged-over-mint-fee-for-one-cent-campaign.a
> spx
>
> An interesting little incident up here last year regarding the Canadian Mint and
> the City of Toronto's use of a penny image in some campaign advertisements, yep
> the world certainly is crazy...
>
> -tgq
>
>
It's absolutely stupid and absurd. Anybody have the right to make and distribute
a depiction of any denominator of the Canadian money as long as that depiction
can't be used as "replacement money". You have full right to create any image of
any coin.
===============================================
For bills:(http://www.bankofcanada.ca/en/banknotes/legislation/repro.html)
---------------Quote--------------------------
Reproducing anything in the likeness of a current bank note is an offence under
the Criminal Code
Section 457 of the Criminal Code provides that anyone one who makes, publishes,
prints, executes, issues, distributes or circulates, including by electronic or
computer-assisted means, anything in the likeness of a current bank note is
guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable to
imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months and a maximum fine of $2,000.
No one shall be convicted of the above offence if the likeness of the Canadian
bank note is
1. printed;
2. less than 3/4 or greater than 1 1/2 times the length or width of the bank
note; and
3. in black and white or only one-sided.
-----------end quote------------------
The same sould also hold for change.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
What happens if you get scared half to death twice?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alain <ele### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> Trevor G Quayle nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2008/01/09 11:10:
> >
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/toronto/archive/2007/10/05/city-outraged-over-mint-fee-for-one-cent-campai
gn.a
> > spx
> >
> > An interesting little incident up here last year regarding the Canadian Mint and
> > the City of Toronto's use of a penny image in some campaign advertisements, yep
> > the world certainly is crazy...
> >
> > -tgq
> >
> >
> It's absolutely stupid and absurd. Anybody have the right to make and distribute
> a depiction of any denominator of the Canadian money as long as that depiction
> can't be used as "replacement money". You have full right to create any image of
> any coin.
> ===============================================
> For bills:(http://www.bankofcanada.ca/en/banknotes/legislation/repro.html)
> ---------------Quote--------------------------
> Reproducing anything in the likeness of a current bank note is an offence under
> the Criminal Code
> Section 457 of the Criminal Code provides that anyone one who makes, publishes,
> prints, executes, issues, distributes or circulates, including by electronic or
> computer-assisted means, anything in the likeness of a current bank note is
> guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable to
> imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months and a maximum fine of $2,000.
>
> No one shall be convicted of the above offence if the likeness of the Canadian
> bank note is
>
> 1. printed;
> 2. less than 3/4 or greater than 1 1/2 times the length or width of the bank
> note; and
> 3. in black and white or only one-sided.
> -----------end quote------------------
> The same sould also hold for change.
>
> --
> Alain
> -------------------------------------------------
> What happens if you get scared half to death twice?
The really odd part is that they want them to pay not only for using the image,
but also for using the phrase "one cent"...
-tgq
PS. I'd say that's just my two cents, but I'm afraid I'll recieve a bill from
the Mint for its usage.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
