 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Okay, folks... media question:
Apart from being next to impossible to get right, it seems ;) media is
excruciatingly slow to get any decent results out of it. I've noticed
that both intervals and samples can have a drastic effect on things.
Is there any way to get good speed on media?
Ohh, yeh, The "and such":
A winning combination of focal-blur, very small (not micro) normals,
refraction, photons and dispersion is very very slow. ;)
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford wrote:
> A winning combination of focal-blur, very small (not micro) normals,
> refraction, photons and dispersion is very very slow. ;)
But not so slow you can't bog it down a little more by adding a few area
lights and radiosity!
Don't know how to speed up your media, sorry.
RG - maybe we should have a slowest code contest...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
gonzo wrote:
> RG - maybe we should have a slowest code contest...
I can write a one-line scene that literally takes forever to parse. :)
Tim.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Bates wrote:
>> gonzo wrote:
>>> RG - maybe we should have a slowest code contest...
>>
>> I can write a one-line scene that literally takes forever to parse.
>> :)
>>
>> Tim.
It would have to result in some nice image though (in the end)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
gonzo wrote:
> But not so slow you can't bog it down a little more by adding a few area
> lights and radiosity!
Haha, I have that too... 2 days and 14 hours so far, and just barely
half through. I keep telling myself it'll be worth it!
> Don't know how to speed up your media, sorry.
Bah...
> RG - maybe we should have a slowest code contest...
Heheh... I think I could maybe win hands-down ;)
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
gonzo <rgo### [at] lanset com> wrote:
> But not so slow you can't bog it down a little more by adding a few area
> lights and radiosity!
Don't forget to put 'normal on' in your radiosity block for extra effect.
Also "forgetting" 'adaptive' from the area lights also helps.
--
plane{-x+y,-1pigment{bozo color_map{[0rgb x][1rgb x+y]}turbulence 1}}
sphere{0,2pigment{rgbt 1}interior{media{emission 1density{spherical
density_map{[0rgb 0][.5rgb<1,.5>][1rgb 1]}turbulence.9}}}scale
<1,1,3>hollow}text{ttf"timrom""Warp".1,0translate<-1,-.1,2>}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Mike Raiford wrote:
| Okay, folks... media question:
|
| Apart from being next to impossible to get right, it seems ;) media is
| excruciatingly slow to get any decent results out of it. I've noticed
| that both intervals and samples can have a drastic effect on things.
|
| Is there any way to get good speed on media?
|
You are of course using "method 3" in your media?
Jerome
- --
******************************
* Jerome M. Berger *
* mailto:jbe### [at] ifrancecom *
* http://jeberger.free.fr/ *
******************************
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFBAUWuqIYJdJhyixIRAno7AJ9WiF8/8+UKwE61abQsitKSWXO0zQCgjtVT
wTHhiDMnVHFhf39G6pDe+yQ=
=eDKa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> You are of course using "method 3" in your media?
Yes, I do have method 3 turned on in media. But if my samples aren't
high enough, the clouds look "flat"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Michael Raiford wrote:
| Yes, I do have method 3 turned on in media. But if my samples aren't
| high enough, the clouds look "flat"
What kind of method are you using for your clouds and what kind of
effect are you trying to get? If all you want are scattered clouds,
the best way to do that is to have one container object and one media
for each cloud. If you want a denser cloud cover, you will need a
bigger container object with one media. If the second, you'll
probably notice that as you lower the samples, problems appear first
near the horizon before they appear closer. In this case, you can
lower your sample count and add some transparent objects to force pov
to take more samples near the horizon (and raise the max_trace_level
accordingly, I hope you don't have to many glass objects in your
scene). Another solution is to use megapov 0.7 and the sample_spacing
keyword to do the same thing without needing to raise the max trace.
Finally, you may want to take a look at Gilles Tran's web site on
clouds:
http://www.oyonale.com/ressources/english/sources13.htm
Jerome
- --
******************************
* Jerome M. Berger *
* mailto:jbe### [at] ifrancecom *
* http://jeberger.free.fr/ *
******************************
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFBAhEtqIYJdJhyixIRApGWAKCIf+2EUtThszyJACIT8i9KAlG02QCgmUWi
b4ocYiN/qRwT3wlsegdbb+Y=
=Deq3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> You are of course using "method 3" in your media?
That's the default, so there's no need to.
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
