On 13-5-2013 10:59, Sean Day wrote:
> I will probably combine the two macros together so you can choose from 1
> of 3 types of moss with or without seed pods. Happy to uploade it if
> anyone wants to use it, there is nothing particularly clever in there
> just trace and some parameters to adjust scale/size/randomness etc.

Moss has always been one of my long standing todo things, so I would be 
very interested to see the macro once it is complete.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

> My first response was "AWESOME ROLEX!"

   I second that... the colors are so natural! Very well done, Sean.

--
Jaime

Post a reply to this message

Sean Day <s.d### [at] uelacuk> wrote:
> Thomas de Groot wrote:
> > One of the best photo-realistic images I have ever seen. Well worth the
> > render time.
> >
> > Moss: blobs?
> >
> > Thomas
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> The moss itself is a mesh object but there are also blobs underneath the
> moss. I place blobs using trace onto the surface of the rock then use
> trace again to place the moss plant onto the blobs. The blobs can be
> used to add a less even look if the surface is flat (not really an issue
> in this case).
>
> It is pretty much the same moss macro that is used in my old train scene
> just with a different mesh object for the moss and an added parameter to
> determine how many of the seed pods are place.
>
> I will probably combine the two macros together so you can choose from 1
> of 3 types of moss with or without seed pods. Happy to uploade it if
> anyone wants to use it, there is nothing particularly clever in there
> just trace and some parameters to adjust scale/size/randomness etc.
>
> Sean

I would really appreciate to learn from your code, this one is really excellent.
May be you consider your moss object itself as "not particularly clever". You
are wrong with that. But as with your train, your guitar, or the stones from
your (natural history) museum your textures are really wonderful. I would really
like to learn how you did the stones or the moss here.

I personally think that your use of focal blur here is completely correct and
not over the top. In some areas of the picture it looks like a little bit to
much, but this seems to be more due to the geometry of the scene which looks a
little bit like the edge of the step of a staircase. In this case you must have
smaller areas of sharpness and decreasing sharpness down the stairs which seems
to be the case here. So I interpret the settings as correct.

Best regards,
Michael

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 13 May 2013 21:16:39 +0200, MichaelJF <mi-### [at] t-onlinede>  
wrote:
I
> would really
> like to learn how you did the stones or the moss here.
>
Hmm that's an idea = put some moss on your stones =)

Going slightly ot, Iwould like to see those stones in a babbling brook or  
a river :)

-- 
-Nekar Xenos-

Post a reply to this message

Hi Michael/Thomas,

I have not added the other moss types yet but for now have uploaded the 
source to this scene to the p.b.s.f group. It contains the macro and 
moss meshes for this scene but not the other two types of moss, at least 
one of them was used in my train scene though so should be on the irtc 
site.

When (or if knowing me) I modify the macro I will upload any updated 
versions..

The moss will not hold up too well to a real close up, something I would 
like to improve as well..

Sean

Post a reply to this message

Great image!

The blur is probably justified to simulate the photographic
effect at this scale and distance. On the other hand it can be
considered an unnecessary image defect ;) will be interesting to
see if expectations change with future light field cameras that
can achieve full focus anywhere. Anyway I think it would be
nice to see a render w/o blur for comparison.

Sean Day wrote:

> Also bumped up the focal blur quality settings a 
> bit, this is the main thing that slows it down, the image with low 
> quality focal blur or just AA only takes a couple of hours to trace.

For such a scene (not many reflections) focal blur could probably be
faked as post-processing based on depth image with little loss.

Post a reply to this message

Sean Day <s.d### [at] uelacuk> wrote:
> Hi Michael/Thomas,
>
> I have not added the other moss types yet but for now have uploaded the
> source to this scene to the p.b.s.f group. It contains the macro and
> moss meshes for this scene but not the other two types of moss, at least
> one of them was used in my train scene though so should be on the irtc
> site.
>
> When (or if knowing me) I modify the macro I will upload any updated
> versions..
>
> The moss will not hold up too well to a real close up, something I would
> like to improve as well..
>
> Sean

Many thanks for posting the code. I'm just rendering it. As I stated I was more
interested into your textures, since I fail a little bit due to this issue. I
came up with the idea to grew moss with the mesh-cam using your textures (I
posted an animation due to this issue some months ago). But I have to find a
proper parametrisation of a Lindenmayer-System, which is not trivial.

Best regards,
Michael

Post a reply to this message

Sean Day <s.d### [at] uelacuk> wrote:

> The moss will not hold up too well to a real close up, something I would
> like to improve as well..

The first I did was to render a 8000 pixel closeup of yor excellent source (no
rad, focal blur, but double_illuminate) - and I'm more than impressed.
Last time I got this feeling was with some JVP or Sam Benge images.
At once I got 5 ideas to enhance own images - so thank you very much for the
source...

For me the close_up detail level is extremely good compared to existant
alternatives - including your own oldroyal moss (which I liked much).

But please improve your moss further, if you want to...


Norbert Kern

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'sean_day_moss_closeup.jpg' (513 KB)

Preview of image 'sean_day_moss_closeup.jpg'

Norbert Kern wrote:
> Sean Day <s.d### [at] uelacuk> wrote:
>
>> The moss will not hold up too well to a real close up, something I would
>> like to improve as well..
>
> The first I did was to render a 8000 pixel closeup of yor excellent source (no
> rad, focal blur, but double_illuminate) - and I'm more than impressed.
> Last time I got this feeling was with some JVP or Sam Benge images.
> At once I got 5 ideas to enhance own images - so thank you very much for the
> source...
>
> For me the close_up detail level is extremely good compared to existant
> alternatives - including your own oldroyal moss (which I liked much).
>
> But please improve your moss further, if you want to...
>
>
> Norbert Kern
>
>

Hi Norbert,

Thanks, I think it looks OK close up but just does not look as much like 
moss and more like some kind of alien plant life which reminds me a bit 
of some of Christoph Gerber's images e.g.

http://gerberc.deviantart.com/art/Moon-21-336009591

I did some really close up renders of the moss (probably had a different 
texture as well). I think they are interesting but I would not guess it 
was moss at this level of detail..

BTW, your first attempt at this round of the tc-rtc looks very impressive.

Sean

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'mossstonehdr1.jpg' (164 KB)

Preview of image 'mossstonehdr1.jpg'

That's the problem with cg: creating a picture large enough to print would 
require a render farm. This one looks nice, so it's a shame it can't go 
farther than a post to a newsgroup.

Still, it's nice to see something besides a Work in Perpetual Progress on 
this server. I peek in here every once in a while, and nothing ever seems to 
get finished.

 -Shay

Post a reply to this message