 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/23/2011 8:06 PM, nemesis wrote:
> awesome!
>
> something triggered inside you recently, huh? non-stop stream of new ideas...
Thanks!
Part of the reason for my increased frequency of postage comes from this
foul weather :/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/24/2011 7:45 AM, B. Gimeno wrote:
> hi:
>
> Only two words: Hall Of Fame!
Thanks, but it's not really a finished scene, just an idea. I wonder
what might be making the bubbles...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/24/2011 8:16 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 24/03/2011 15:45, B. Gimeno a écrit :
>> hi:
>>
>> Only two words: Hall Of Fame!
>
> Two words... then you mean: "Hollow Foam", right ?
That's funny, since I was originally trying to make foam with this
method. It worked, but not well :(
> It must be the water in my ears. Or the bubbles...
>
> Really great!
Thanks :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/24/2011 1:11 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> "Jim Holsenback"<jho### [at] povray org> schreef in bericht
> news:4d8ab1f2@news.povray.org...
>> On 03/23/2011 10:53 PM, Trevor G Quayle wrote:
>>> This looks very nice. You were able to get that bubbles rushing to the
>>> surface
>>> look, as opposed to suspended air bubbles that basic spheres look like.
>>
>> agreed ... a cleaver solution that's very natural looking.
>>
>
> I join the crowd.
:)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
stbenge <"egnebts <-inverted"@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/23/2011 7:52 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> > On 03/23/2011 10:53 PM, Trevor G Quayle wrote:
> >> This looks very nice. You were able to get that bubbles rushing to the
> >> surface
> >> look, as opposed to suspended air bubbles that basic spheres look like.
> >
> > agreed ... a cleaver solution that's very natural looking.
>
> I originally tried to use the technique for in-air soap bubbles, but the
> inside edges were too thick. Too bad there's not an easier way to model
> minimal surfaces...
For soap bubbles in the air, usually the bubble surface is thin enough that any
refraction is not noticeable. I am thinking you could just use the blob, but
without refraction or ior, however this would preclude being able to use fresnel
reflection.
-tgq
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/24/2011 11:24 AM, Christian Froeschlin wrote:
> Looks sweet, how is it lit?
The scene is only lit with a sky_sphere; that's why it rendered so quickly.
>> For each blob all other points are tested
>
> if you really mean "all other points", you could probably
> optimize this for a large number of bubbles by sorting vertically
> in n log(n) time ... so unfortunately no bubble sort :D (*groan*).
>
> Then you only need to test points up to a maximum y distance. Of
> course such information might already be available depending how
> you generate your points in the first place.
This might just work, because the points /are/ created in vertical
succession.
Even better yet would be Voronoi evaluation for all points, then I'd
know the nearest neighbors. Unfortunately, Voronoi calculations for
point sets are still beyond my capabilities :(
The biggest problem I'm having now is choosing when to subtract a
bubble, and when not to. If a bubble resides inside another one, it
currently subtracts that bubble. I need to maybe *add* that inside
bubble, not subtract it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 3/24/2011 11:39 AM, Trevor G Quayle wrote:
> stbenge<"egnebts<-inverted"@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On 3/23/2011 7:52 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>> On 03/23/2011 10:53 PM, Trevor G Quayle wrote:
>>>> This looks very nice. You were able to get that bubbles rushing to the
>>>> surface
>>>> look, as opposed to suspended air bubbles that basic spheres look like.
>>>
>>> agreed ... a cleaver solution that's very natural looking.
>>
>> I originally tried to use the technique for in-air soap bubbles, but the
>> inside edges were too thick. Too bad there's not an easier way to model
>> minimal surfaces...
>
> For soap bubbles in the air, usually the bubble surface is thin enough that any
> refraction is not noticeable. I am thinking you could just use the blob, but
> without refraction or ior, however this would preclude being able to use fresnel
> reflection.
Let's see... I used separate blobs for each bubble and one blob for a
thin film over everything. The latter had a very slight ior. The real
problem was the blobs were making edges that were too rounded. This
might be helped with better neighbor evaluation.
Attached is an image showing how it was turning out. It's not too bad,
better than no bubbles at all I suppose ;)
Sam
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'bubbles1.png' (49 KB)
Preview of image 'bubbles1.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 24.03.2011 19:27, schrieb stbenge:
> On 3/24/2011 7:45 AM, B. Gimeno wrote:
>> hi:
>>
>> Only two words: Hall Of Fame!
>
> Thanks, but it's not really a finished scene, just an idea. I wonder
> what might be making the bubbles...
I guess maybe I... DON'T WANT TO KNOW! >_<
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Very cool. Zazzle it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>stbenge on date 24/03/2011 20:06 wrote:
[...]
>
> Let's see... I used separate blobs for each bubble and one blob for a
> thin film over everything. The latter had a very slight ior. The real
> problem was the blobs were making edges that were too rounded. This
> might be helped with better neighbor evaluation.
>
> Attached is an image showing how it was turning out. It's not too bad,
> better than no bubbles at all I suppose ;)
>
> Sam
Very convincing, Sam!
It was generated by Pov code or with an external program?
Paolo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
