"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Materials need some work though; the metal is too shiny (even for chrome I
> guess), while the glass does not seem reflective enough to me. The material on
> the left is just boring - whatever it is.

You reckon? I think it's pretty photorealistic. Maybe the brightness of the
reflections on the glass and metal should be closer in intensity, but
individually they're certainly believable. And the material on the left is by
far the most interesting to my eyes - lovely shading into the crevices,
reflection-based highlights... like porcelain or similar.

That said, a touch of SSS wouldn't hurt the 'boring' one... ;-)

Post a reply to this message

"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> That said, a touch of SSS wouldn't hurt the 'boring' one... ;-)

I was actually thinking that, too - but things will still take some time ;)

Post a reply to this message

"Edouard" <pov### [at] edouardinfo> wrote:
>
> But, in the meantime, you've inspired me to do some work on my own bank lighting
> macros in my stochastic render rig.
> ...

The refracting objects need some shadows.  To use an analogy with traditional
lighting methods, the areas around the glass look like they were illuminated
with interior { caustics } rather than with photon mapping.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'glass_shadows.jpg' (19 KB)

Preview of image 'glass_shadows.jpg'

"Edouard" <pov### [at] edouardinfo> wrote:
> "fidos" <fid### [at] wanadoofr> wrote:
> > A new simple test of the ligthing technic describe in
> > http://www.ignorancia.org/en/index.php?page=Studio_lighting_kit
> >
> > Also with mcpov in around 11h on 4 cores.
>
> Thank-you for that great render - I've got to try mcpov one day!
>
> But, in the meantime, you've inspired me to do some work on my own bank lighting
> macros in my stochastic render rig.
>
> My version took around 10 hours on two 1.6GHz cores (equaling 400 passes). 50mm
> lens at f/4 from about 1.2m away using my 35mm camera macros.
>
> Each pass had a random area light source corresponding to a portion of one of
> the banks, so in effect there are 400 area lights in the final render.
>
> The floor, along with the middle and right statues have micronormals to produce
> a blurred reflection (and refraction). 400 passes equals 400 averaged textures.
>
> Cheers,
> Edouard.

Very goog results. For me, the best is the glass one (better than mine).

Regards,
Fidos.

Post a reply to this message

"Cousin Ricky" <ric### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> "Edouard" <pov### [at] edouardinfo> wrote:
> >
> > But, in the meantime, you've inspired me to do some work on my own bank lighting
> > macros in my stochastic render rig.
> > ...
>
> The refracting objects need some shadows.  To use an analogy with traditional
> lighting methods, the areas around the glass look like they were illuminated
> with interior { caustics } rather than with photon mapping.

Well spotted - the glass sphere (as well as the glass statue) simply use
"interior { caustics }" to give some impression of the light traveling through
the material.

I haven't got around to trying photons yet in my rig - it may well work by
taking a very low number of samples, since in effect you end up with 400 times
as many if you do 400 passes.

Cheers,
Edouard.

Post a reply to this message

"fidos" <fid### [at] wanadoofr> wrote:

> Very goog results. For me, the best is the glass one (better than mine).

Thank-you very much. I find it interesting to see how realistic a render one can
do with a vanilla version of POV, and mcpov is an amazing benchmark to try and
match.

Cheers,
Edouard.

Post a reply to this message

"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>
> > That said, a touch of SSS wouldn't hurt the 'boring' one... ;-)
>
> I was actually thinking that, too - but things will still take some time ;)

I've taken Sam Benge's FastSSS macro (from his fastprox include file) and
modified it to suit my render rig, and also changed my bank light macros to put
the current frame's light position into the SSS calculation. It's still all
faked, but I think it's got promise. Seems to be adding about 3 seconds to a 3
minute pass.

Here are two passes - the full render is on it's way.

Cheers,
Edouard.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'two-passes.jpg' (218 KB)

Preview of image 'two-passes.jpg'

"Edouard" <pov### [at] edouardinfo> wrote:

> I've taken Sam Benge's FastSSS macro (from his fastprox include file) and
> modified it to suit my render rig, and also changed my bank light macros to put
> the current frame's light position into the SSS calculation. It's still all
> faked, but I think it's got promise. Seems to be adding about 3 seconds to a 3
> minute pass.
>
> Here are two passes - the full render is on it's way.

Here 'tis!

Cheers,
Edouard.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'ajax-sss.jpg' (159 KB)

Preview of image 'ajax-sss.jpg'

"Edouard" <pov### [at] edouardinfo> wrote:
> > I've taken Sam Benge's FastSSS macro (from his fastprox include file) and
> > modified it to suit my render rig, and also changed my bank light macros to put
> > the current frame's light position into the SSS calculation. It's still all
> > faked, but I think it's got promise. Seems to be adding about 3 seconds to a 3
> > minute pass.
>
> Here 'tis!

Looks very realistic! Although not like some green marble - more like some
whatever, lacquered (bet it's not spelt that way) with green paint...

Post a reply to this message

"clipka" <nomail@nomail> schreef in bericht 
news:web.49cd3bf9f0387919208afb30@news.povray.org...
>
> Looks very realistic! Although not like some green marble - more like some
> whatever, lacquered (bet it's not spelt that way) with green paint...
>
>

*lacquered* it is indeed  :-)   But this is not lacquer, it is definitely 
ceramics.  Well done Edouard!!

Thomas

Post a reply to this message