Very beautiful, indeed! And surely it did take a lot of work to code the 
shapes. Are they meshes or CSG?

Did you consider posting the polyherda to the object-library? I think a lot 
of people would like to play with these beautiful shapes... me for one ;-)

Can't help it, I am something of a magpie - I love glittering things...

Post a reply to this message

"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> "Simone" <inf### [at] alienenterprisesde> wrote:

> The shadows are bright in my image because I used radiosity with a bright
> environment, so there are no completely shadowed areas. However, if you have a
> sphere and a single light source, a largely dark shadow with a single bright
> spot is to be expected. It only looks odd because you don't often get that
> lighting setup in reality.

Yes, I think I'll have to try with radiosity right from the start. First I
thought I would try it with only a single light and without radiosity and when
it looks halfway decent, to enhance it with radiosity and another light source.
Because having radiosity right from the beginning is always so time consuming
that it doesn't work well with my trial and error approach :))

Alain <aze### [at] qwertyorg> wrote:
> Glass objects, as well as metallic ones, need some environment to look
> good.
Yes, I already had a plane and skysphere. I also tried to put some other
transparent objects around and set them to no_image. It does lighten up the
shadows of the still visible sphere, but at the same time the sphere's shadow
starts too look dull and not colorful. And then when there is supposed to be
only one sphere in the scene, reflections from other objects on the spere's
surface look a little weird, too. On the other hand, if there are no such
reflections, it looks too sterile. Simple things seem to me sometimes the most
difficult.

However, thanks for the various advice. If I'll manage to come up with a decent
result I'll post it here :)

Post a reply to this message

"TC" <do-not-reply@i-do get-enough-spam-already-2498.com> wrote:
> Very beautiful, indeed! And surely it did take a lot of work to code the
> shapes. Are they meshes or CSG?

They are meshes, and can be used in CSG, but I didn't generate the data myself.
The vertex/face data comes from here:

http://www.georgehart.com/virtual-polyhedra/vp.html

It's all in VRML format, but I wrote a tool to convert the files to POV-Ray .inc
files, as a set of macros (with various texture options) as well as a global
array holding the vertices. The only really hard work I've been doing is
tweaking the macros to orient the polyhedra pleasingly.

> Did you consider posting the polyherda to the object-library? I think a lot
> of people would like to play with these beautiful shapes... me for one ;-)

I probably need to contact the author of the above site first to make sure he's
happy with me swiping his vertices (naturally he'd be credited in all the .inc
files), but that was my eventual intention.

> Can't help it, I am something of a magpie - I love glittering things...

That's what raytracing was invented for! :-)

Post a reply to this message

> "Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> "Simone" <inf### [at] alienenterprisesde> wrote:
> 
>> The shadows are bright in my image because I used radiosity with a bright
>> environment, so there are no completely shadowed areas. However, if you have a
>> sphere and a single light source, a largely dark shadow with a single bright
>> spot is to be expected. It only looks odd because you don't often get that
>> lighting setup in reality.
> 
> Yes, I think I'll have to try with radiosity right from the start. First I
> thought I would try it with only a single light and without radiosity and when
> it looks halfway decent, to enhance it with radiosity and another light source.
> Because having radiosity right from the beginning is always so time consuming
> that it doesn't work well with my trial and error approach :))
> 
> Alain <aze### [at] qwertyorg> wrote:
>> Glass objects, as well as metallic ones, need some environment to look
>> good.
> Yes, I already had a plane and skysphere. I also tried to put some other
> transparent objects around and set them to no_image. It does lighten up the
> shadows of the still visible sphere, but at the same time the sphere's shadow
> starts too look dull and not colorful. And then when there is supposed to be
> only one sphere in the scene, reflections from other objects on the spere's
> surface look a little weird, too. On the other hand, if there are no such
> reflections, it looks too sterile. Simple things seem to me sometimes the most
> difficult.
> 
> However, thanks for the various advice. If I'll manage to come up with a decent
> result I'll post it here :)
> 
> 


During the initial stage, use a shadowless fill light. It's brightness 
should be kept low, normaly at less than 0.2, around 0.1.

A second light is much faster than using radiosity, and a shadowless 
light is faster than a regular one because you don't do any shadow test 
for those.

Alain

Post a reply to this message

This is a very beautiful stil image. Well-done!

Post a reply to this message