![](/i/fill.gif) |
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
jhu wrote:
> ok, here are more reflective billiard balls
Very nice :))
One bill 15, the lower white part have some gray spots not visible
elsewhere, is it correct? Or strange normal, or glitches from radiosity?
--
RafaĆ Maj
Software developer
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: my pool table with shinier billiard balls
Date: 14 Aug 2008 04:03:28
Message: <48a3e6d0$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
"Rafal" <new### [at] limcore com> schreef in bericht
news:48a36d74@news.povray.org...
>
> One bill 15, the lower white part have some gray spots not visible
> elsewhere, is it correct? Or strange normal, or glitches from radiosity?
>
That is the reflection of the felt. Ball 10 shows the same.
Excellent work, btw, jhu!
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
From: Christian Froeschlin
Subject: Re: my pool table with shinier billiard balls
Date: 14 Aug 2008 15:37:34
Message: <48a4897e$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
jhu wrote:
> where should the light(s) be placed?
Have a look at
http://www.pool-and-billiards.com/pool_table_lights.htm
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Here's the latest one. Something doesn't seem quite right though.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'billiard_05.jpg' (94 KB)
Preview of image 'billiard_05.jpg'
![billiard_05.jpg](/povray.binaries.images/attachment/%3Cweb.48a630929c5df9dd8b562d820%40news.povray.org%3E/billiard_05.jpg?preview=1)
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Wasn't it jhu who wrote:
>Here's the latest one. Something doesn't seem quite right though.
The combination of pin sharp reflections and high focal blur might not
be realistic. If there's enough focal blur to fuzz out a ball that's a
foot away from the centre of focus, then I'd expect it to affect the
reflection of the window that's several yards away.
--
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
I don't think in real life the reflection would be blurred out.
Mike Williams <nos### [at] econym demon co uk> wrote:
> Wasn't it jhu who wrote:
>
> >Here's the latest one. Something doesn't seem quite right though.
>
> The combination of pin sharp reflections and high focal blur might not
> be realistic. If there's enough focal blur to fuzz out a ball that's a
> foot away from the centre of focus, then I'd expect it to affect the
> reflection of the window that's several yards away.
>
> --
> Mike Williams
> Gentleman of Leisure
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
ok found an image. It's not all that pronounced
Mike Williams <nos### [at] econym demon co uk> wrote:
> Wasn't it jhu who wrote:
>
> >Here's the latest one. Something doesn't seem quite right though.
>
> The combination of pin sharp reflections and high focal blur might not
> be realistic. If there's enough focal blur to fuzz out a ball that's a
> foot away from the centre of focus, then I'd expect it to affect the
> reflection of the window that's several yards away.
>
> --
> Mike Williams
> Gentleman of Leisure
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'image-002.jpg' (32 KB)
Preview of image 'image-002.jpg'
![image-002.jpg](/povray.binaries.images/attachment/%3Cweb.48a679169c5df9dd8b562d820%40news.povray.org%3E/image-002.jpg?preview=1)
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Mike Williams wrote:
>
> The combination of pin sharp reflections and high focal blur might not
> be realistic. If there's enough focal blur to fuzz out a ball that's a
> foot away from the centre of focus, then I'd expect it to affect the
> reflection of the window that's several yards away.
>
Nnnope. The point of focus is still on the surface of the ball,
containing practically an image of the reflected area, so DoF won't
affect on the reflection - for a camera the reflection is like a photo
on a stand.
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethis zbxt net invalid
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Wasn't it Eero Ahonen who wrote:
>Mike Williams wrote:
>> The combination of pin sharp reflections and high focal blur might
>>not be realistic. If there's enough focal blur to fuzz out a ball
>>that's a foot away from the centre of focus, then I'd expect it to
>>affect the reflection of the window that's several yards away.
>>
>
>Nnnope. The point of focus is still on the surface of the ball,
>containing practically an image of the reflected area, so DoF won't
>affect on the reflection - for a camera the reflection is like a photo
>on a stand.
That's cool. So if I want to take a photo and eliminate focal blur
completely, I can just take the photo of a mirror? The reflection will
be on the surface of the mirror, so if I focus on the mirror itself
things reflected from any distance will all be in perfect focus.
--
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Eero Ahonen <aer### [at] removethis zbxt net invalid> wrote:
> Nnnope. The point of focus is still on the surface of the ball,
> containing practically an image of the reflected area, so DoF won't
> affect on the reflection - for a camera the reflection is like a photo
> on a stand.
Well, not quite. Just because it's in a mirror doesn't mean the laws of physics
don't apply. For a diverging mirror (like a sphere) a virtual image exists a
short distance behind the mirror. For a ball with radius R, an object at
infinity produces a virtual image about R/2 behind the surface. This probably
falls well within the depth of field, so the smaller the radius of the ball,
the more it tends to focus the reflection. Of course it can never be perfectly
in focus though, and a planar mirror won't do anything.
- Ricky
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |