 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Quick question: What jpeg-quality should one use when posting images in this
group? What filesizes are acceptable for 800x600?
I'm a beginner, so if anyone wants to give me hints'n'tips about the scene;
keep it at a beginner-level or you'll just confuse me. :-)
/j
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'wowefib2.jpg' (108 KB)
Preview of image 'wowefib2.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Your a beginner? That's excellent!
Jan Danielsson wrote:
> [Image]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas Lake wrote:
>
> Your a beginner? That's excellent!
>
> Jan Danielsson wrote:
>
> > [Image]
I will agree with that.
In regards to your question about compression I use anywhere from
10-15%. If it is a simple scene I get good results and reasonable
file sizes with 15% using PSP. If it has a lot of detail or a lot
of blue colors with subtle changes from one color to the next I go
with the lower compression rate as it seems to help to reduce the
jpg defects that show up in these types of images. Too be one the
safe side try, if at all possible, to keep your images under 100k
in size and you should have no problems with people in this group.
--
Ken Tyler
mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
When I use radiosity I set quality no lower then 95%. Otherwise, I have gone
60%, but some images are unforgiving there. You almost have to experiment to
get it perfect, but like Ken said (if it's under 100k...)
Nice work. :)
GrimDude
vos### [at] arkansas net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Holy mad cows from heck! This is excellent!
-Ian
Jan Danielsson <Jan### [at] falunmailteliacom> wrote in message
news:wnaqnavryffbasnyhaznvygryvnpbz.faq5nb5.pminews@news.povray.org...
>[Image]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Very nice. What is it?
Cheers
Steve
Jan Danielsson wrote:
>
> [Image]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>Very nice. What is it?
Now; THAT is a good question... :-)
As I see it, there are two groups of raytraced pictures: 'photo realistic'
(the rolex watch) and 'just cool effects' (the fractal cheeze). I myself do
not like 'photo realistic' as much as I like the 'just cool effects'. (Btw; I
love watching demos with spinning chrome-blobs and similar).
Many of the 'photo realistic' images I've seen in this group are _very_
impressive, they do look alot like photos. However, I myself still like 'cool
effects' more. But the world of computergraphics would be dull if it wasn't
for the all the different styles.
/j
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I say merge it with the pic of Ken Tyler and call it his Multi-dimensional brain!
From the Psychobabbler from the Psychosphere!
Jan Danielsson wrote:
> >Very nice. What is it?
>
> Now; THAT is a good question... :-)
>
> As I see it, there are two groups of raytraced pictures: 'photo realistic'
> (the rolex watch) and 'just cool effects' (the fractal cheeze). I myself do
> not like 'photo realistic' as much as I like the 'just cool effects'. (Btw; I
> love watching demos with spinning chrome-blobs and similar).
>
> Many of the 'photo realistic' images I've seen in this group are _very_
> impressive, they do look alot like photos. However, I myself still like 'cool
> effects' more. But the world of computergraphics would be dull if it wasn't
> for the all the different styles.
>
> /j
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'us-ascii' (1 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
This is a great image. I like this abstract sort of things...
Jan Danielsson wrote:
>
> [Image]
--
//Spider
[ spi### [at] bahnhofse ]-[ http://www.bahnhof.se/~spider/ ]
What I can do and what I could do, I just don't know anymore
"Marian"
By: "Sisters Of Mercy"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
