"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> I didn't know that; interesting. The trouble is, should it be in meters or feet?
> Most of the world uses metric units; but here in the 'States, we still use feet
> and inches (mostly.)

As you Americans probably can't even decide whether to use feet or inches,
obviously it should be metric :P

But no kidding actually: what kind of size system would *you* prefer to code
your scenes in - one in which you can easily compute the next bigger or smaller
scales by just moving around the decimal point, or one where you have to
multiply/divide by 12, 3, and 1760, respectively?

.... I mean, if it wasn't for the sake of local tradition of the country you
happen to have grown up in.

Post a reply to this message

clipka wrote:
> But no kidding actually:

FWIW, I think this has been discussed extensively three or four times in 
off-topic. :-)  It seems fixing the scale of a POV-ray model is one of the 
easier fixes, especially if it doesn't make the object move (as in, the feet 
are centered at 0,0,0)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

"clipka" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

> As you Americans probably can't even decide whether to use feet or inches,
> obviously it should be metric :P
>
> But no kidding actually: what kind of size system would *you* prefer to code
> your scenes in - one in which you can easily compute the next bigger or smaller
> scales by just moving around the decimal point, or one where you have to
> multiply/divide by 12, 3, and 1760, respectively?
>
> .... I mean, if it wasn't for the sake of local tradition of the country you
> happen to have grown up in.

I think the world measurement standard--of everything, every quantity--should be
in POV-Ray units. Then everybody's happy. :-P  Never any ambiguity!

KW

Post a reply to this message

"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> schreef in bericht 
news:web.49df9cd1ae5b6cf3f50167bc0@news.povray.org...
> I'm still curious about my scaling and positioning questions. Since you're 
> quite
> familiar with using POSER and/or other 'real' figures, can you give me any
> advice?

Feet at the origin is the way to go. This is the way of Poser and Daz, and 
it is easier to pose in an environment.

Imo, scaling is not really an issue. I find it always very easy to re-scale 
a figure according to my (changing) needs.

*posability* though, is an important issue. IK (or FK for that matter) would 
be a needed addition for the figure to become useful. That might be a lot of 
tedious work ahead, but very gratifying in the end. Years ago I did that on 
a stick figure built in Moray, but also with plants (reeds for instance) to 
be bent by the wind.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> I didn't know that; interesting. The trouble is, should it be in meters or feet?
> Most of the world uses metric units; but here in the 'States, we still use feet
> and inches (mostly.)

#declare INCHES2METERS = 0.0254;
#declare FEET2INCHES = 12;
#declare FEET2METERS = FEET2INCHES * INCHES2METERS;
#declare METERS2INCHES = 1/INCHES2METERS;
#declare INCHES2FEET = 1/FEET2INCHES;
#declare METERS2FEET = 1/FEET2METERS;
#declare INCHES2METRES = INCHES2METERS;
#declare FEET2METRES = FEET2METERS;
#declare METRES2INCHES = METERS2INCHES;
#declare METRES2FEET = METERS2FEET;

Pick a unit.  Scale to taste.

Oh yeah, something needs to be done with that head.  Nothing fancy (as per your
goal), but it needs to be more than just an ellipsoid.

Post a reply to this message

"Cousin Ricky" <ric### [at] yahoocom> wrote:

>
> #declare INCHES2METERS = 0.0254;
> #declare FEET2INCHES = 12;
> #declare FEET2METERS = FEET2INCHES * INCHES2METERS;
> #declare METERS2INCHES = 1/INCHES2METERS;
> #declare INCHES2FEET = 1/FEET2INCHES;
> #declare METERS2FEET = 1/FEET2METERS;
> #declare INCHES2METRES = INCHES2METERS;
> #declare FEET2METRES = FEET2METERS;
> #declare METRES2INCHES = METERS2INCHES;
> #declare METRES2FEET = METERS2FEET;
>
> Pick a unit.  Scale to taste.

That's a useful table; thanks.

With all that's been suggested, though, I think I'm just going to leave the
scaling at 1 POV unit; it seems to be more logical and 'basic', and can be
easily changed.

I'm getting the sense that, even though the model is meant as a temporary
stand-in, posability would be a great asset. So I'm going to take some extra
time and re-work the model with that in mind. PLUS a reconstruction of the head
(which I'll post some new images of here.) The process shouldn't take too long,
so I'll be back soon!

KW

Post a reply to this message

OK, don't laugh. Here's the re-worked head. Well, it's better than the 'alien
egg,' anyway.

I can truthfully say, without hesitation, that it's difficult to model a human
head out of basic shapes! (And I finally broke down and took a look at Burne
Hogarth's book, "Drawing the Human Head".) There's a fine line between the
result looking *reasonably* OK, and looking...grotesque!

I need to 'live' with this result for a few days, but I *already* see a need for
improvement, so I'll keep working on it. As usual, suggestions welcome
[**groan**]

KW

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'new_head_1.jpg' (63 KB)

Preview of image 'new_head_1.jpg'

"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> OK, don't laugh.

I'm trying... *very* hard... >_<

I have great respect for though; I'd probably have given up on the whole project
at the "egg-headed alien" stage.

Post a reply to this message

"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> schreef in bericht 
news:web.49e3181bae5b6cf3f50167bc0@news.povray.org...
> OK, don't laugh. Here's the re-worked head. Well, it's better than the 
> 'alien
> egg,' anyway.
>
> I can truthfully say, without hesitation, that it's difficult to model a 
> human
> head out of basic shapes! (And I finally broke down and took a look at 
> Burne
> Hogarth's book, "Drawing the Human Head".) There's a fine line between the
> result looking *reasonably* OK, and looking...grotesque!
>
> I need to 'live' with this result for a few days, but I *already* see a 
> need for
> improvement, so I'll keep working on it. As usual, suggestions welcome
> [**groan**]
>

Now, this is a huge improvement indeed! Much, much better than Egghead. His 
neck is a bit thick now, maybe.

As a stand-in, this is very acceptable already, but you know how things go: 
next, you (or others) will want a *realistic* stand-in :-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Kenneth wrote:
> OK, don't laugh. Here's the re-worked head. Well, it's better than the 'alien
> egg,' anyway.

Not bad, not bad. If you're going for improved realism, you might want to 
keep the buttocks from poking out the fronts of the thighs. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message