I'm writing a sky sphere map generator, this is the image:

There is room for improvement, but still an achievement.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'color_image size4800 g0.9 level2.png' (999 KB)

Preview of image 'color_image size4800 g0.9 level2.png'

Not decide go for commercial or free software...

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'color_image multi_size6000 sample3 sunset level2.png' (964 KB)

Preview of image 'color_image multi_size6000 sample3 sunset level2.png'

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'color_image good sunset.png' (1101 KB)

Preview of image 'color_image good sunset.png'

"And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
> I'm writing a sky sphere map generator, this is the image:
>
> There is room for improvement, but still an achievement.

Wonderful, however, where does the noise come from?

Post a reply to this message

"Mr" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
> > I'm writing a sky sphere map generator, this is the image:
> >
> > There is room for improvement, but still an achievement.
>
> Wonderful, however, where does the noise come from?

Thank you.
Well, the noise is very common here. It can reduce by generating more samples.

Post a reply to this message

Hard work.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'sky render01.png' (1064 KB)

Preview of image 'sky render01.png'

On 7-1-2017 9:15, And wrote:
> Hard work.
>

LOL

It is coming along well as far as I can judge. As an indication, can you 
tell us what the render time is for those images, particularly when you 
get rid of the noise (more samples)?

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 1/7/2017 8:15 AM, And wrote:
> Hard work.
>

But not unattractive. :)

Sorry for the double negative.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 7-1-2017 9:15, And wrote:
> > Hard work.
> >
>
> LOL
>
> It is coming along well as far as I can judge. As an indication, can you
> tell us what the render time is for those images, particularly when you
> get rid of the noise (more samples)?
>
> --
> Thomas

These images took unfavorable render time, about 12 hours for the left two
demos, they are from a 1024x512 spherical image.

My computer is amd fx-8350 but in fact I can only run it in half speed with my
program.


I ever tried the "reduse noise" filter of Photoshop and it is what benefit the
situation so write a filter is a solution, too.

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 1/7/2017 8:15 AM, And wrote:
> > Hard work.
> >
>
> But not unattractive. :)
>
> Sorry for the double negative.
>
> --
>
> Regards
>      Stephen


Happy new year!

Post a reply to this message

"And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
>
> These images took unfavorable render time, about 12 hours for the left two
> demos, they are from a 1024x512 spherical image.
>
> My computer is amd fx-8350 but in fact I can only run it in half speed with my
> program.
>
> I ever tried the "reduse noise" filter of Photoshop and it is what benefit the
> situation so write a filter is a solution, too.

Whew! Yeah, long time.

I don't know how you're doing these but the last 4 skies look very good if I
ignore the color noise.

If you could monochrome the most intense colors that might help.

Bob

Post a reply to this message

On 7-1-2017 12:36, And wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> On 7-1-2017 9:15, And wrote:
>>> Hard work.
>>>
>>
>> LOL
>>
>> It is coming along well as far as I can judge. As an indication, can you
>> tell us what the render time is for those images, particularly when you
>> get rid of the noise (more samples)?
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
> These images took unfavorable render time, about 12 hours for the left two
> demos, they are from a 1024x512 spherical image.
>
> My computer is amd fx-8350 but in fact I can only run it in half speed with my
> program.
>
>
> I ever tried the "reduse noise" filter of Photoshop and it is what benefit the
> situation so write a filter is a solution, too.
>

Hmm yes, what I thought. That may give trouble when integrated into a 
landscape scene with trees and such.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"omniverse" <omn### [at] charternet> wrote:
> "And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
> >
> > These images took unfavorable render time, about 12 hours for the left two
> > demos, they are from a 1024x512 spherical image.
> >
> > My computer is amd fx-8350 but in fact I can only run it in half speed with my
> > program.
> >
> > I ever tried the "reduse noise" filter of Photoshop and it is what benefit the
> > situation so write a filter is a solution, too.
>
> Whew! Yeah, long time.
>
> I don't know how you're doing these but the last 4 skies look very good if I
> ignore the color noise.
>
> If you could monochrome the most intense colors that might help.
>
> Bob


I don't understand.

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> On 7-1-2017 12:36, And wrote:
> > Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> >> On 7-1-2017 9:15, And wrote:
> >>> Hard work.
> >>>
> >>
> >> LOL
> >>
> >> It is coming along well as far as I can judge. As an indication, can you
> >> tell us what the render time is for those images, particularly when you
> >> get rid of the noise (more samples)?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thomas
> >
> > These images took unfavorable render time, about 12 hours for the left two
> > demos, they are from a 1024x512 spherical image.
> >
> > My computer is amd fx-8350 but in fact I can only run it in half speed with my
> > program.
> >
> >
> > I ever tried the "reduse noise" filter of Photoshop and it is what benefit the
> > situation so write a filter is a solution, too.
> >
>
> Hmm yes, what I thought. That may give trouble when integrated into a
> landscape scene with trees and such.
>
> --
> Thomas


I want to give up...
I posted the fruit too early... I just tested the cloud shape and it is hard to
control. And too much work (includes reducing the render time) in the future.

Post a reply to this message

Am 08.01.2017 um 15:51 schrieb And:

> I want to give up...

And we want you to continue ;)

> I posted the fruit too early... I just tested the cloud shape and it is hard to
> control. And too much work (includes reducing the render time) in the future.

"Hard to control" is just a pessimist's way of saying "something
encouraging to toy around with".

As for the render times, I gather that this whole thing is a stand-alone
program, right? So maybe it would be worth trying to port this to OpenCL
and get your graphics card to do the job. I reckon the computations
should lend themselves to the architecture of GPUs.

Post a reply to this message

Am 08.01.2017 um 17:16 schrieb clipka:
> Am 08.01.2017 um 15:51 schrieb And:
> 
>> I want to give up...
> 
> And we want you to continue ;)

That said, if you decide to cease work on it, maybe you could publish
the source code under some free-ish license, so that others could pick
up on it. From what I see, it has a lot of potential that would be a
pity to waste.

Post a reply to this message

"And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
> "omniverse" <omn### [at] charternet> wrote:
> > "And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
> > >
> > > These images took unfavorable render time, about 12 hours for the left two
> > > demos, they are from a 1024x512 spherical image.
> > >
> > > My computer is amd fx-8350 but in fact I can only run it in half speed with my
> > > program.
> > >
> > > I ever tried the "reduse noise" filter of Photoshop and it is what benefit the
> > > situation so write a filter is a solution, too.
> >
> > Whew! Yeah, long time.
> >
> > I don't know how you're doing these but the last 4 skies look very good if I
> > ignore the color noise.
> >
> > If you could monochrome the most intense colors that might help.
> >
> > Bob
>
>
> I don't understand.

I was thinking of post-processing filter, too, like was mentioned before. I
don't know how possible that is though. Idea being, desaturate colors that go
beyond a certain threshold since the overall colors of the sky isn't fully one
color or the other.

Of course, that still would show a kind of colorless noise. The ideal thing
would be to duplicate nearby colors and replace the intense red, green and blue
colors with those. Yet again I don't know the limitations to such filter
creation. Just was thinking out loud.

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> Am 08.01.2017 um 15:51 schrieb And:
>
> > I want to give up...
>
> And we want you to continue ;)
>
> > I posted the fruit too early... I just tested the cloud shape and it is hard to
> > control. And too much work (includes reducing the render time) in the future.
>
> "Hard to control" is just a pessimist's way of saying "something
> encouraging to toy around with".

Ha ha..

> As for the render times, I gather that this whole thing is a stand-alone
> program, right? So maybe it would be worth trying to port this to OpenCL
> and get your graphics card to do the job. I reckon the computations
> should lend themselves to the architecture of GPUs.


GPU is an unfamiliar field to me.

> That said, if you decide to cease work on it, maybe you could publish
> the source code under some free-ish license, so that others could pick
> up on it. From what I see, it has a lot of potential that would be a
> pity to waste.

That's a good idea but the code is ugly currently(ew). If I decide to cease
work, I will publish it that time

Post a reply to this message

"omniverse" <omn### [at] charternet> wrote:
> "And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
> > "omniverse" <omn### [at] charternet> wrote:
> > > "And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > These images took unfavorable render time, about 12 hours for the left two
> > > > demos, they are from a 1024x512 spherical image.
> > > >
> > > > My computer is amd fx-8350 but in fact I can only run it in half speed with my
> > > > program.
> > > >
> > > > I ever tried the "reduse noise" filter of Photoshop and it is what benefit the
> > > > situation so write a filter is a solution, too.
> > >
> > > Whew! Yeah, long time.
> > >
> > > I don't know how you're doing these but the last 4 skies look very good if I
> > > ignore the color noise.
> > >
> > > If you could monochrome the most intense colors that might help.
> > >
> > > Bob
> >
> >
> > I don't understand.
>
> I was thinking of post-processing filter, too, like was mentioned before. I
> don't know how possible that is though. Idea being, desaturate colors that go
> beyond a certain threshold since the overall colors of the sky isn't fully one
> color or the other.
>
> Of course, that still would show a kind of colorless noise. The ideal thing
> would be to duplicate nearby colors and replace the intense red, green and blue
> colors with those. Yet again I don't know the limitations to such filter
> creation. Just was thinking out loud.

I got it. That is something like the median filter. Well

Post a reply to this message

Some new updates here

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test7 2 level8 52h20m.png' (462 KB)

Preview of image 'test7 2 level8 52h20m.png'

"And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
> Some new updates here

Wrote some codes in java to simulate the effect as Pov ray's turbulence warp.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test12 sun_angle 30 level8 43h16m.png' (476 KB)

Preview of image 'test12 sun_angle 30 level8 43h16m.png'

pure sky:

sun angle 0 degree

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test22 sun0 level5 18hr.png' (859 KB)

Preview of image 'test22 sun0 level5 18hr.png'

sky:

sun angle 10 degree above horizon.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test23 sun10 level5 11hr40m.png' (771 KB)

Preview of image 'test23 sun10 level5 11hr40m.png'

On 25/06/2018 07:59, And wrote:
> pure sky:
> 
> sun angle 0 degree
> 

I like this but 18 hours render time! What is the resolution of the image?

If the sun is on the horizon should it not be redder?

BTW can your sky sphere map generator, create a green flash?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_flash
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwus2nqU0SY


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 25/06/2018 08:02, And wrote:
> sky:
> 
> sun angle 10 degree above horizon.
> 

Nice but never look directly at the sun. ;-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 25/06/2018 07:59, And wrote:
> > pure sky:
> >
> > sun angle 0 degree
> >
>
> I like this but 18 hours render time! What is the resolution of the image?
>

Only 720x360

> If the sun is on the horizon should it not be redder?
>

When the sun is on the horizon it can be yellow, red, or invisible, just depend
on the atmosphere condition.
My program could be rich on the atmosphere condition settings. But still work in
progress.

> BTW can your sky sphere map generator, create a green flash?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_flash
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwus2nqU0SY
>
The video is so perfect!(maybe with the music)

Green flash is due to air refract, my program can turn on air refract, but have
bugs and still not implement for different wavelength.
>
> --
>
> Regards
>      Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 25/06/2018 12:15, And wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>> On 25/06/2018 07:59, And wrote:
>>> pure sky:
>>>
>>> sun angle 0 degree
>>>
>>
>> I like this but 18 hours render time! What is the resolution of the image?
>>
> 
> Only 720x360
> 
>> If the sun is on the horizon should it not be redder?
>>
> 
> When the sun is on the horizon it can be yellow, red, or invisible, just depend
> on the atmosphere condition.
> My program could be rich on the atmosphere condition settings. But still work in
> progress.
> 

:-)

>> BTW can your sky sphere map generator, create a green flash?
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_flash
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwus2nqU0SY
>>
> The video is so perfect!(maybe with the music)
> 

Also Sprach Zarathustra


> Green flash is due to air refract, my program can turn on air refract, but have
> bugs and still not implement for different wavelength.
>>

It is good work.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Export a smoke density data to it from Blender.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'smoke2.png' (397 KB)

Preview of image 'smoke2.png'

max density set to 0.1g/m^3

width about 0.4km

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'density0.1 sun30 reduce_at4 level20 24hr.png' (764 KB)

Preview of image 'density0.1 sun30 reduce_at4 level20 24hr.png'

max density 1.2g/m^3

the same size.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'density1.2 reduce_at4 level32 19hr30m.png' (810 KB)

Preview of image 'density1.2 reduce_at4 level32 19hr30m.png'

"And" <49341109@ntnu.edu.tw> wrote:
> max density 1.2g/m^3
>
> the same size.

max density 2.5g/m^3

size up to about 0.8km

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'density2.5 sun30 reduce_at4 level32 34hr.png' (830 KB)

Preview of image 'density2.5 sun30 reduce_at4 level32 34hr.png'

I will release it when it is okay. At least one year.

Post a reply to this message

On 10/11/2018 13:20, And wrote:
> I will release it when it is okay. At least one year.
> 

Your time frame is a bit of a disappointment. :-(
It is interesting that you are incorporating df3s into it. :-)

<Aside>
Have you seen, Oosawa 4D Volume Viewer?
http://qcganime.web.fc2.com/OOSAWA/oosawaE.html

One interesting feature is the program can mesh-ify df3s and export them 
as mesh2 or obj.
Unfortunately (for me) the help file is in Japanese.



-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 11/11/2018 11:09, Stephen wrote:
> One interesting feature is the program can mesh-ify df3s and export them 
> as mesh2 or obj.

Forgot to mention that he calls it an isosurface. and the export for 
mesh2 is faulty as it includes a trailing comma at the end of each section.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 10/11/2018 13:20, And wrote:
> > I will release it when it is okay. At least one year.
> >
>
> Your time frame is a bit of a disappointment. :-(
It is rendered by my notebook, using 3 thread.
That's true. But After these tests It will improve(I guess about 2x).



> It is interesting that you are incorporating df3s into it. :-)
Uh huh


>
> <Aside>
> Have you seen, Oosawa 4D Volume Viewer?
> http://qcganime.web.fc2.com/OOSAWA/oosawaE.html

No. I never heard it.


>
> One interesting feature is the program can mesh-ify df3s and export them
> as mesh2 or obj.
> Unfortunately (for me) the help file is in Japanese.
>
>
Not bad


>
> --
>
> Regards
>      Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Rendering cloud needs more time than smoke because the internal scattering in
cloud is very much. It seldom absorb light. So the high level scattering is
frequent.

The attached diagram is about the spectral radiance(light strength) vs level.

first level collect most light because of the sky part of the image. The
scattering of sky is much weak than cloud. Another point is that after level 4 I
using reduce coefficient to calculate the cloud as an approximate. If calculate
complete condition(no approx.) the high level are even more important.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test20 diagram reduce_at4 sun30 density1.2.png' (178 KB)

Preview of image 'test20 diagram reduce_at4 sun30 density1.2.png'

This diagram calculates complete condition.(no reduce coefficient)

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test20 diagram no_reduce sun30 density1.2.png' (200 KB)

Preview of image 'test20 diagram no_reduce sun30 density1.2.png'

I just want to show the previous images that I rendered with my program.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test21 density1.2 reduce_at4 level32 3hr48m.png' (825 KB)

Preview of image 'test21 density1.2 reduce_at4 level32 3hr48m.png'

The lower sun(15 degree above horizon)

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test24 sun15 level32 23hr.png' (755 KB)

Preview of image 'test24 sun15 level32 23hr.png'

This one is rendered by my father's computer, faster than my notebook.

This one shows the bug.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test1 30 density1.4 30hr45m.png' (1238 KB)

Preview of image 'test1 30 density1.4 30hr45m.png'

Using df3 file from Pov-ray output.

#declare p_dens =
pigment{
spherical
    color_map{
            [0.22 rgb 0]
            [0.32 rgb 1]
            [1.0 rgb 1]
             }
   scale 4.4
   warp{turbulence .8 omega .7}
}

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test13 sun60 level18 20hr30m color3.png' (863 KB)

Preview of image 'test13 sun60 level18 20hr30m color3.png'

And This is the Pov-ray version:

using two point lights.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'df3_convert_test 2 res200.png' (76 KB)

Preview of image 'df3_convert_test 2 res200.png'

material with scattering and absorb.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test8 15hr.png' (788 KB)

Preview of image 'test8 15hr.png'

Only scattering, no absorb

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test9 22hr.png' (705 KB)

Preview of image 'test9 22hr.png'

Another scattering and absorb. The light source and atmosphere is the same on
these three images.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test10 8hr30m.png' (809 KB)

Preview of image 'test10 8hr30m.png'

pure sky

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test5 16hr.png' (385 KB)

Preview of image 'test5 16hr.png'

I'm proud of my ability. It is really like smoke(with the help of blender). At
least I have known how to simulate the optical process and produce the correct
result. The render speed is slow. So I found another algorithm metropolis light
transport to study.. for the future.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'test12 16hr.png' (760 KB)

Preview of image 'test12 16hr.png'