Christian Froeschlin <chr### [at] chrfrde> wrote:

>
> Oh, I like this one, moody, not so colorful.
>
> And you don't even need to worry how your sun looks ;)
>
> Now put some water and terrain below that sky!

As everyone may guess, the sky is not my only subject of study. I am also
working on water (not as difficult as the sky), and terrains (not quite easy to
automate).

These are different and 'orthogonal' works. I think I ended up with something
operatable for skies. I already have something for terrains and the main
principles and features are OK (as embryos). Water is not really a problem
(still water I mean ..).

My idea is to gather all in a single system (with many parameters ...), allowing
of course to add user defined objects in scenes with provided placement macros.
The triplet sky-terrain-water would then be a framework for scenes, with tools
and predefined stuff and so.

As I got inspired by Terragen, I have named this projet TerraPOV.

Thanks to those who encouraged me for my skies. I keep you informed.

    Friendly

        Bruno

Post a reply to this message

Bruno Cabasson wrote:
> As I got inspired by Terragen, I have named this projet TerraPOV.

   I hope you have more success than I with my "Project Tierra".... I have 
it stalled, waiting for large amounts of free time to expend... :)

   BTW, if the rest of the elements come with the same quality as the skies, 
it can be a great system!

--
Jaime

Post a reply to this message

"Jaime Vives Piqueres" <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> schreef in bericht 
news:4739b527$1@news.povray.org...
> Bruno Cabasson wrote:
>> As I got inspired by Terragen, I have named this projet TerraPOV.
>
>   I hope you have more success than I with my "Project Tierra".... I have 
> it stalled, waiting for large amounts of free time to expend... :)
>
Well... The Earth was not built in seven days...  :-)

>   BTW, if the rest of the elements come with the same quality as the 
> skies, it can be a great system!

I agree.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlDOTnet> wrote:
> "Jaime Vives Piqueres" <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> schreef in bericht
> news:4739b527$1@news.povray.org...
> > Bruno Cabasson wrote:
> >> As I got inspired by Terragen, I have named this projet TerraPOV.
> >
> >   I hope you have more success than I with my "Project Tierra".... I have
> > it stalled, waiting for large amounts of free time to expend... :)
> >
> Well... The Earth was not built in seven days...  :-)

I thought that it was done in 6 days :)

>
> >   BTW, if the rest of the elements come with the same quality as the
> > skies, it can be a great system!
>
> I agree.
>
> Thomas

So do I, they are really very good skies.

Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com> wrote in message 
news:web.4739c699a0e33012726bd13c0@news.povray.org...
> "Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlDOTnet> wrote:
>> "Jaime Vives Piqueres" <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> schreef in bericht
>> news:4739b527$1@news.povray.org...
>> > Bruno Cabasson wrote:
>> >> As I got inspired by Terragen, I have named this projet TerraPOV.
>> >
>> >   I hope you have more success than I with my "Project Tierra".... I 
>> > have
>> > it stalled, waiting for large amounts of free time to expend... :)
>> >
>> Well... The Earth was not built in seven days...  :-)
>
> I thought that it was done in 6 days :)
>

Opinions differ ...  :o)

Chris B.

Post a reply to this message

"Chris B" <nom### [at] nomailcom> wrote:
> "Stephen" <mcavoys_AT_aolDOT.com> wrote in message
> news:web.4739c699a0e33012726bd13c0@news.povray.org...
> > "Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlDOTnet> wrote:
> >> "Jaime Vives Piqueres" <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> schreef in bericht
> >> news:4739b527$1@news.povray.org...
> >> > Bruno Cabasson wrote:
> >> >> As I got inspired by Terragen, I have named this projet TerraPOV.
> >> >
> >> >   I hope you have more success than I with my "Project Tierra".... I
> >> > have
> >> > it stalled, waiting for large amounts of free time to expend... :)
> >> >
> >> Well... The Earth was not built in seven days...  :-)
> >
> > I thought that it was done in 6 days :)
> >
>
> Opinions differ ...  :o)
>

So they do. But since it was before my time I'll leave it to my elders to
correct me. :)


Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Jaime Vives Piqueres <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote:
> Bruno Cabasson wrote:
> > As I got inspired by Terragen, I have named this projet TerraPOV.
>
>    I hope you have more success than I with my "Project Tierra".... I have
> it stalled, waiting for large amounts of free time to expend... :)
>
>    BTW, if the rest of the elements come with the same quality as the skies,
> it can be a great system!
>
> --
> Jaime

Thank you Jaime!!

Coming from you it is a great encouragement for me!

I am not finished yet with skies. For example, I must integrate single-cloud
macros (with or without DF3 generation step), with optional flat bottoms. I
already have some results. I also would like to define a typology for clouds
and the corresponding settings in order to define "macro-settings". I also have
to deal with the Sun appearance and halo (not very successful until now).

For cumuli, the problem is different than clouscapes and quite tricky. I think
I'll have to do with single clouds. But I am afraid that the turbulence feature
is not completely appropritate for the 'roundness' of cumuli. I tried with the
current system, but it is not suitable for cumuli and I could never get
acceptable results (mainly because the density is based on standard patterns).
Perhaps a particle system will be necessary, but I absolutely do not master
that. Advice/ideas welcome.

For terrain, the embryo is close to be operational for the basic features.

'*' mean implemented
'+' means partielly implemented
'-' means not yet implemented.

The engine can (will) provide several views:
    *) Elevation view (see attached file in next p.b.i post), inspired by
Terragen: Grayscale with iso-levels and decorations, including text.
    *) Scene view
    -) Sky dome generation view
    -) Local view of the scene from above with all objects.

It can define the terrain either as
    *) pigment-based function (user-defined), allowing overhangs (isosurface)
    *) Height field out of pigment function
    *) Height field out of image_map
    *) Image_map generation from pigment function

It can (will) define the sky as
    *) Media, like the skies I already posted. Allows cloudscape to cast shadows
    -) Sky-dome image map (probably a sphere)
    -) DF3 generation for single clouds.

It provides (or will) for
    +) Placement macros and utilities
    +) Predefined textures (thanks for contribs)
    *) Water
    -) Embeded SDL-code (TBC)
    +) Adding user-defined objects, one main interest of TerraPOV.

One big piece will also be to incorporate vegetation. It can use POV-Tree, and
stuff from PlantStudio or so. I would like to provide for pattern-based
placement macros (I already have something for that).

I want all be declarative, so that a MMI can be easily plugged. For example, for
the last version of my sky system, and for the sky that is currently rendering:

// ======================== DECLARATIONS ===============================
#declare QUICK = no;

// Sun
#declare SUN_ELEVATIONS = array [5] {10, 20, 5, 0.5, -0.5};
#declare SUN_HEADING = 20;
#declare SUN_POWER = 4;

// Atmosphere
#declare Ta = 110*km;
#declare Ha = -1*m;
#declare BASE_SKY_COLOR = rgb <0.45, 0.65, 1>;
#declare k = 1.2;
#declare DENSITY_BASE_POWER = 4;
#declare DENSITY_POWER_FACTOR = 1;
#declare ATMO_INTERVALS = 3;
#declare ATMO_SAMPLES = 5;
#declare ATMO_QUICK_INTERVALS = 1;
#declare ATMO_QUICK_SAMPLES = 5;

// Layers
#declare USE_LAYER_1 = no;
#declare USE_LAYER_2 = yes;
#declare USE_LAYER_3 = yes;

// Layer 1: high low-density clouds
#declare L1_H = 8000*m;
#declare L1_T = 300*m;
#declare L1_SCATTERING = 2.5;
#declare L1_SCATTERING_COLOR = White;
#declare L1_ABSORPTION = 0.5;
#declare L1_ABSORPTION_COLOR = White;
#declare L1_INTERVALS = 3;
#declare L1_SAMPLES = 5;
#declare L1_QUICK_INTERVALS = 1;
#declare L1_QUICK_SAMPLES = 5;
#declare L1_DENSITY = density
{
    wrinkles
    scale <100,1,100>
    scale L1_T
    color_map {[0.63 rgb 0.0][1 rgb 0.2]}
}

// Layer 2: normal height quite opaque cloud cover
#declare L2_H = 1000*m;
#declare L2_T = 200*m;
#declare L2_SCATTERING = 1;
#declare L2_SCATTERING_COLOR = White;
#declare L2_ABSORPTION = 0.25;
#declare L2_ABSORPTION_COLOR = 0.5+0.3*(1-Pink);
#declare L2_INTERVALS = 3;
#declare L2_SAMPLES = 3;
#declare L2_QUICK_INTERVALS = 1;
#declare L2_QUICK_SAMPLES = 3;
#declare L2_DENSITY = density
{
    wrinkles
    scale <15, 1, 15>
    warp {turbulence 0.3 octaves 10 lambda 2.05 omega 0.63}
    scale L2_T
    translate <300, 0, 5000>*m*z
    //color_map {[0.35 rgb 0.][0.36 rgb 0.6][0.8 rgb 0.9]}
    color_map {[0 rgb 1][0.6 rgb 0.7][0.75 rgb 0]}
}

// Layer 3: Ground-to-Layer2 haze for scattering beams
#declare L3_H = -1*m;
#declare L3_T = L2_H-L3_H - 1*m;
#declare L3_SCATTERING = 1;
#declare L3_SCATTERING_COLOR = White;
#declare L3_ABSORPTION = 0;
#declare L3_ABSORPTION_COLOR = White;
#declare L3_INTERVALS = 5;
#declare L3_SAMPLES = 10;
#declare L3_QUICK_INTERVALS = 1;
#declare L3_QUICK_SAMPLES = 5;
#declare L3_DENSITY = density
{
    function {0.1}
}

// Camera
#declare VIEW_CAM = 0;
#declare FISHEYE_CAM = 1;
#declare CAM = VIEW_CAM;

// Radiosity
#declare USE_RAD = yes;
#declare BUILD_RAD_DATA = no;
#declare RAD_BRIGHT = 1 ;
#declare RAD_FILE_NAME = "sky_22.rad";
// ====================== END OF DECLARATIONS ==========================


    Bruno


PS: By essence, skies require intensively the media feature. What about media
with 3.7?

Post a reply to this message

> PS: By essence, skies require intensively the media feature. What about media
> with 3.7?

What's your problem, too slow? Send me a zip with the scene and all 
needed files (even the *standard* include files) and settings you want. 
As long as you don't use radiosity, I can use tiled rendering on it to 
spread it on a dozen machines.

Post a reply to this message

Bruno Cabasson wrote:
> For cumuli, the problem is different than clouscapes and quite tricky. I think
> I'll have to do with single clouds. But I am afraid that the turbulence feature
> is not completely appropritate for the 'roundness' of cumuli. I tried with the
> current system, but it is not suitable for cumuli and I could never get
> acceptable results (mainly because the density is based on standard patterns).
> Perhaps a particle system will be necessary, but I absolutely do not master
> that. Advice/ideas welcome.

   For my cumuli I used the object pattern, using as object a conglomerate 
of spheres, distributed in a loop to resemble the shape of a cloud, then 
used this with media and turbulence. But as you said, I never got realistic 
results with turbulence... it should be my fault, because Gilles used it 
very well on his DF3 clouds.

> It can define the terrain either as
>     *) pigment-based function (user-defined), allowing overhangs (isosurface)
>     *) Height field out of pigment function
>     *) Height field out of image_map
>     *) Image_map generation from pigment function

   I would add "isosurface based on a external heightfield". I have some WIP 
on this subject, and it is very handy, as you can control the general shape 
of the terrain with a heightfield "guide" and then add overhangs with an 
extra function. I even developed a method to add the overhangs only on the 
vertical parts, although it is very trick (requires calculating a "slope 
map" of the heightfield first).

> It can (will) define the sky as
>     *) Media, like the skies I already posted. Allows cloudscape to cast shadows
>     -) Sky-dome image map (probably a sphere)
>     -) DF3 generation for single clouds.

   For the skydome imagemap (which can be very useful indeed), take into 
account the possible output as HDR. This means getting a good balance 
between the intensity of the sky and the sun.

>     *) Water

   Plane, heightfield or isosurface? For close-ups to the shoreline, an hf 
or isosurface is very convenient.

  > One big piece will also be to incorporate vegetation. It can use 
POV-Tree, and
> stuff from PlantStudio or so. I would like to provide for pattern-based
> placement macros (I already have something for that).

   I think it's better to let the user supply their own plants/trees, you 
only need to provide the placement macros.

> I want all be declarative, so that a MMI can be easily plugged. For example, for
> the last version of my sky system, and for the sky that is currently rendering:

   Looks like the right direction to me...

> PS: By essence, skies require intensively the media feature. What about media
> with 3.7?

   IIRC, it will get ride of the container artifacts you are going to meet 
with individual clouds... ;)

--
Jaime

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom> wrote:

> > PS: By essence, skies require intensively the media feature. What about media
> > with 3.7?
>
> What's your problem, too slow? Send me a zip with the scene and all
> needed files (even the *standard* include files) and settings you want.
> As long as you don't use radiosity, I can use tiled rendering on it to
> spread it on a dozen machines.

Thanks for the proposal! I'll think of it if needed!

Concerning 3.7, I made a few tests and the results were different in brightness
and color. Maybe I'll try again... I also noticed that it was faster on the
contrary.

    Bruno

Post a reply to this message