|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
What's the ior for glucose sweets(hard candy)? like Beacon Sparkles or candy
rolls. I haven't been very successful in getting a realistic candy render.
-Nekar Xenos-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 13/02/2015 09:17, Nekar Xenos a écrit :
> What's the ior for glucose sweets(hard candy)? like Beacon Sparkles or candy
> rolls. I haven't been very successful in getting a realistic candy render.
>
> -Nekar Xenos-
>
>
It seems that 84% sucrose solution in water has ior about 1.5 (whereas
water is 1.33), so solid sugar might be around 1.5 to 1.56.
Now the problem might be the laminated sugar on sweets: you might have
to model an opaque core within a surrounding sugar coating. And here
come the problem of coincident inner surface (not a problem, just no
inner surface for the coating)
the coating might be about a millimetre deep. Remember to increase
max_trace_level.
I wonder if the Subsurface scattering can be used to model that instead.
--
Just because nobody complains does not mean all parachutes are perfect.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 11:11:39 +0200, Le_Forgeron <lef### [at] freefr> wro
te:
>> What's the ior for glucose sweets(hard candy)? like Beacon Sparkles o
r
>> candy
>> rolls. I haven't been very successful in getting a realistic candy
>> render.
>>
>> -Nekar Xenos-
>>
>>
> It seems that 84% sucrose solution in water has ior about 1.5 (whereas
> water is 1.33), so solid sugar might be around 1.5 to 1.56.
>
> Now the problem might be the laminated sugar on sweets: you might have
> to model an opaque core within a surrounding sugar coating. And here
> come the problem of coincident inner surface (not a problem, just no
> inner surface for the coating)
>
> the coating might be about a millimetre deep. Remember to increase
> max_trace_level.
>
> I wonder if the Subsurface scattering can be used to model that instea
d.
>
Thanks, Le Forgeron,
I didn't consider the sugar coating. Subsurface scattering might be
overkill. Or it might just be the thing that makes it look more realisti
c.
--
-Nekar Xenos-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 11:11:39 +0200, Le_Forgeron <lef### [at] freefr> wrote:
>
>>> What's the ior for glucose sweets(hard candy)? like Beacon Sparkles
>>> or candy
>>> rolls. I haven't been very successful in getting a realistic candy
>>> render.
>>>
>>> -Nekar Xenos-
>>>
>>>
>> It seems that 84% sucrose solution in water has ior about 1.5 (whereas
>> water is 1.33), so solid sugar might be around 1.5 to 1.56.
>>
>> Now the problem might be the laminated sugar on sweets: you might have
>> to model an opaque core within a surrounding sugar coating. And here
>> come the problem of coincident inner surface (not a problem, just no
>> inner surface for the coating)
>>
>> the coating might be about a millimetre deep. Remember to increase
>> max_trace_level.
>>
>> I wonder if the Subsurface scattering can be used to model that instead.
>>
> Thanks, Le Forgeron,
> I didn't consider the sugar coating. Subsurface scattering might be
> overkill. Or it might just be the thing that makes it look more realistic.
>
Clear candy coating, or clear candy, should be transparent and don't
need subsurface scattering.
If you want an opaque candy, then, subsurface scattering looks like it's
a must.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alain <kua### [at] videotronca> wrote:
>
> Clear candy coating, or clear candy, should be transparent and don't
> need subsurface scattering.
>
> If you want an opaque candy, then, subsurface scattering looks like it's
> a must.
>
>
> Alain
It has to be transparent. I think Le Forgeron was talking about the slight matt
finish on candy.
-Nekar Xenos-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Alain <kua### [at] videotronca> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Clear candy coating, or clear candy, should be transparent and don't
>> need subsurface scattering.
>>
>> If you want an opaque candy, then, subsurface scattering looks like it's
>> a must.
>>
>>
>> Alain
>
> It has to be transparent. I think Le Forgeron was talking about the slight matt
> finish on candy.
>
> -Nekar Xenos-
>
>
>
>
For a slight mate finish, just use a mate finish: lowish and broad
highlights, medium-low and blurred reflection should do the trick.
Alain
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Depending on what sort of hard candy you're modeling, it may be perfectly
translucent, or it may have air-bubble inclusions in the form of bubbles in the
case of cast candies like lollipops, or the long striations of stretched
candies.
Also, there is likely to be a very thin coating of wax or mineral oil to provide
gloss and prevent sticking to the wrapper.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-_CaDRD7jQ
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |