On 04/06/2010 10:20 AM, Woland wrote:
> And this one...
>

Much better. :-D

-- 

Best Regards,
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 04/06/2010 10:19 AM, Woland wrote:
> "Bill Pragnell"<bil### [at] hotmailcom>  wrote:
>> For test renders, you might want to use a plain box, or a Round_Box, or even a
>> mesh for the bricks - any of these will be faster than isosurfaces, and save you
>> a lot of render time while developing other aspects of the scene.
>>
>> And as others said, it's a bit dark.
>>
>> Should be interesting though, good luck with the next iteration!
>>
>> Bill
>
> A little brighter version... with different textures...
>

I know it is nitpicking but the walls of the towers should not be 
stepped or the bad guys could climb up them. Still it is improving by 
leaps and bounds.

-- 

Best Regards,
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Woland wrote:

> And this one...

Looks nice.

I'm no expert on towers but to me it looks like the
overhanging tops of the towers would need supports lest
the stones just drop down. Also I wonder about the gap
between the ground and the bottom row of stones.

Post a reply to this message

"Woland" <ziz### [at] wppl> schreef in bericht 
news:web.4c08c544530345cb397a02140@news.povray.org...
> And this one...
>
>

Aaah! Much better!

Most comments have already been given, so I won't repeat them here. The 
castle doesn't need necessarily be realistic. On medieval castles, the 
overhangs were supported by stone wedges, often with holes in between used 
for dropping hot oil on unfriendly visitors :-)
Even older castles (or poorer ones) had a wood superstructure, covered with 
wet hides for protection against flaming arrows. You may consider that for 
making the construction even more interesting.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Now, this is really nitpicking, but there are some vertical seams between 
stones which are aligned, weakening the overall structural strength... I 
have seen this in RL too, without damaging effect though...

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

It might need some filling between the stones.

Post a reply to this message

"Sven Littkowski" <Sve### [at] Jamaica-Focuscom> wrote:
> It might need some filling between the stones.

Yes, I think this will look better with some fillings hide some parts and whole
stones, and when stones will be more irregular.
In next render i'll try to do this and some wooden parts.
But the most difficult thing for me is to have time to do this :(:(

Post a reply to this message

"Sven Littkowski" <Sve### [at] Jamaica-Focuscom> wrote:
> It might need some filling between the stones.

I've made some fillings, but everything now looks bad for me... stones are the
same, and there is to big order in whole construction.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'proba.jpg' (150 KB)

Preview of image 'proba.jpg'

On 12/06/2010 9:45 AM, Woland wrote:
> "Sven Littkowski"<Sve### [at] Jamaica-Focuscom>  wrote:
>> It might need some filling between the stones.
>
> I've made some fillings, but everything now looks bad for me... stones are the
> same, and there is to big order in whole construction.
>

The gaps for the mortar are maybe a bit too big but on the whole it is 
getting better and better.

-- 

Best Regards,
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

> "Sven Littkowski"<Sve### [at] Jamaica-Focuscom>  wrote:
>> It might need some filling between the stones.
>
> I've made some fillings, but everything now looks bad for me... stones are the
> same, and there is to big order in whole construction.
>

The mortar looks to thick. Less mortar and more stones, then it should 
looks beter.
Maybe also more variations in the mortar colour, or a higher frequancy.

Anyway, there is a great improvement since the original version.


Alain

Post a reply to this message