So, are we doing it or what?

I really liked Tony[B]'s idea to get the Pendulum figure in POV. I guess we
could start with that concept and build as our imagination (and POV skills,
and time constraints, and etc.) allows us.

I'd like to take a shot at those walls, although texturizing them could be a
bit beyond me.

Shall we dance? Who is up to it?

Ruy

Post a reply to this message

Ruy wrote:

> I'd like to take a shot at those walls, although texturizing them could be
> a bit beyond me.
> 
> Shall we dance? Who is up to it?

  Count with me for some texturing or lighting. I'm too busy to model, and 
it is really not my best. 

  Then, it's turn for the "project manager" to start distributing work. Any 
takers?

-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres

La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message

>   Count with me for some texturing or lighting. I'm too busy to model, and
> it is really not my best.
>
>   Then, it's turn for the "project manager" to start distributing work.
Any
> takers?

I see this project as follows:

- Modelling

    * Walls
    * Horizontal Poles Extending from The Walls
    * "Frames" On the Walls (for lack of a better word to describe them)
    * Doors, windows on the wall
    * Objects hanging from the poles and looking/falling out of the
doors/windows

- Texturing

    * All of the above

- Lighting

    * Overall scene
    * Radiosity
    * Photons (if there should be objects that need them
    * Individual objects (Light Groups. Yes? No? Maybe?)

What do you guys think?

Ruy

Post a reply to this message

> I see this project as follows:
>
> - Modelling

You forgot the child.

> - Lighting
>
>     * Radiosity

I tried it. It does not play nice with the isosurface. It would make for a
very slow render.



OK. Since I came up with the idea, I guess I'm the manager. Hehe. That
sounded cool. Alrighty. First things first, we need for everybody to see the
full-resolution image. Jaime, I'm going to e-mail it to you so you can put
it up on ignorancia.org, OK? Secondly, I'm going to post the source for what
I've done so far in the international binaries group. I've just about got
the camera set up right, and the walls are acceptable too. Both still need
work.


Thanks for showing interest guys! I'm glad the group is alive. :)

--
Anthony Bennett

Post a reply to this message

Tony[B] wrote:

> You forgot the child.

  Well, depending of the view and size, we can use a Blobman model.
 

> I tried it. It does not play nice with the isosurface. It would make for a
> very slow render.

  Anyhow, in this case, are not more apropiated (and fast) height_fields 
with the same functions?
 
> OK. Since I came up with the idea, I guess I'm the manager. Hehe. 

 I was just about to say it! :)

> the full-resolution image. Jaime, I'm going to e-mail it to you so you can
> put it up on ignorancia.org, OK? 

  Ok, I will make a page for the "povray.inernational team work".  But, 
just for curiosity:

  1) Who is the author of this image?
  2) Can it be published on the web freely?

> Secondly, I'm going to post the source
> for what I've done so far in the international binaries group. I've just
> about got the camera set up right, and the walls are acceptable too. Both
> still need work.

  It can be posted also on p.i.b. the succesive WIP's of the project, 
mantaining the last one on the team page. Anyone making improvements or 
additions can show it trough p.b.i, and we can discuss here the inclusion 
on the "official" scene.
 
-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres

La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message

"Jaime Vives Piqueres" <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> escribió en el mensaje
news:3c36088d@news.povray.org...
> Tony[B] wrote:
>
> > You forgot the child.

I think I can take that job, using Poser3. Campanilla was a 1st try (for the
"Fantasy and Mystic" IRTC's round) and I would like to give it another
chance. If you think it's OK I'll put my hands on it.

>
> > I tried it. It does not play nice with the isosurface. It would make for
a
> > very slow render.
>
>   Anyhow, in this case, are not more apropiated (and fast) height_fields
> with the same functions?

I was thinking of a H.E.Day's work with heighfield pattern (done in Megapov)
with a sandy ground and black monolites that appeared evenly.

> > OK. Since I came up with the idea, I guess I'm the manager. Hehe.
>
>  I was just about to say it! :)

Hurray for the manager!!! ;-)

> > the full-resolution image. Jaime, I'm going to e-mail it to you so you
can
> > put it up on ignorancia.org, OK?
>
>   Ok, I will make a page for the "povray.inernational team work".  But,
> just for curiosity:
>
>   1) Who is the author of this image?
>   2) Can it be published on the web freely?

Ouch...

> > Secondly, I'm going to post the source
> > for what I've done so far in the international binaries group. I've just
> > about got the camera set up right, and the walls are acceptable too.
Both
> > still need work.

Fine, feed us Tony.

>   It can be posted also on p.i.b. the succesive WIP's of the project,
> mantaining the last one on the team page. Anyone making improvements or
> additions can show it trough p.b.i, and we can discuss here the inclusion
> on the "official" scene.

"Ground Control to Mayor Ton[y]
 Commencing countdown, engines on
 Check ignition and may God's love be with you.
  10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, Liftoff " (David Bowie with a little tweak)

  Let's go ->>>>>>>>>>>>>
--
Txemi Jendrix
tji### [at] euskalnetnet
http://www.geocities.com/txemijendrix

Post a reply to this message

>   Well, depending of the view and size, we can use a Blobman model.

Or a Poser model. That would be the idea solution.

>   Anyhow, in this case, are not more apropiated (and fast) height_fields
> with the same functions?

Um... I tried that. For some reason I was horribly unsucessful. If you can
retool it to work like that, be my guest.

>  I was just about to say it! :)

:)

>   Ok, I will make a page for the "povray.inernational team work".  But,
> just for curiosity:
>
>   1) Who is the author of this image?

Michael Whelan.

>   2) Can it be published on the web freely?

AFAIK, it's not available on his website at this resolution any more, but it
used to be... I don't see why we should have any problems though. We're not
in any way trying to make money off of it, and we would of course credit
him.

>   It can be posted also on p.i.b. the succesive WIP's of the project,
> mantaining the last one on the team page. Anyone making improvements or
> additions can show it trough p.b.i, and we can discuss here the inclusion
> on the "official" scene.

An interesting idea. But I would prefer to keep all WIPs in p.i.b and the
milestones on your site. Is that OK?

Post a reply to this message

> I think I can take that job, using Poser3. Campanilla was a 1st try (for
the
> "Fantasy and Mystic" IRTC's round) and I would like to give it another
> chance. If you think it's OK I'll put my hands on it.

Be my guest! I really should get Poser one of these days...

> I was thinking of a H.E.Day's work with heighfield pattern (done in
Megapov)
> with a sandy ground and black monolites that appeared evenly.

The heightfield for this image would be gigantic, unless we could find a way
of tiling a many large heightfields without it showing.

> Hurray for the manager!!! ;-)

Gracias. <takes a bow> :)

> Fine, feed us Tony.

<ding!> Enjoy your meal.

> "Ground Control to Mayor Ton[y]
>  Commencing countdown, engines on
>  Check ignition and may God's love be with you.
>   10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, Liftoff " (David Bowie with a little
tweak)
>
>   Let's go ->>>>>>>>>>>>>

Haha. :-D

Post a reply to this message

Tony[B] wrote:

> AFAIK, it's not available on his website at this resolution any more, but it
> used to be... I don't see why we should have any problems though. We're not
> in any way trying to make money off of it, and we would of course credit
> him.


There is a golden rule in such cases : ASK !!

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message

Tony[B] wrote:
> >   Well, depending of the view and size, we can use a Blobman model.
>
> Or a Poser model. That would be the ideal solution.

Nah, the ideal solution would be to model it by hand with Hamapatch: much more
satisfactory, much better if you own the needed skill. ;)

--
#local j=text{ttf"arial""JRG".2,0}#local J=0;#while(J<10)#local R=0;#while
(R<2)#local G=0;#while(G<1)#if(inside(j<R,G.1>))object{j scale.025translate
<R-1G-J/20J/-40+2>pigment{rgb<9J>}}#debug"O"#else#debug" "#end#local G=G+
.025;#end#local R=R+.05;#debug"\n"#end#local J=J+1;#end// JRG

Home: http://digilander.iol.it/jrgpov

Post a reply to this message

"Tony[B]" <ben### [at] catholicorg> escribió en el mensaje
news:3c36203d@news.povray.org...
> > I think I can take that job, using Poser3.
>
> Be my guest! I really should get Poser one of these days...

OK, I'll need the image at a higher resolution (so you also like Michael
Whelan... great artist, isn't he?).

> The heightfield for this image would be gigantic, unless we could find a
way
> of tiling a many large heightfields without it showing.

I don't know (I think Jaime is the master with heightfields, I remember a
Canyon...).
H.E.Day's code was:
height_field {
pattern 400, 400 {
hf_gray_16
bozo
color_map {
[ 0.0 color rgb 0.5 ]
[ 0.2 color rgb 0.0375 ]
[ 1.0 color rgb 0.0 ]
}
warp {turbulence 1 lambda .25}
scale 0.05
}
smooth
scale <100,75,100>
translate <-50, 0, -50>
texture{
pigment{granite color_map {[0 rgb 1][1 rgb .5]}
scale 2
scale 5*y
}
finish {ambient 0 diffuse 1 crand .05}
}
}
It renders fast, and maybe could be a start
I'm going to start posing the child.
Bye
--
Txemi Jendrix
tji### [at] euskalnetnet
http://www.geocities.com/txemijendrix

Post a reply to this message

> OK, I'll need the image at a higher resolution (so you also like Michael
> Whelan... great artist, isn't he?).

Jaime should be putting it up on his site soon... or maybe we will need to
ask Mr. Whelan first. I don't know. It used to be on his website. He doesn't
have them so large any more. I'm not an old fan of his, a friend just sent
this one to me via ICQ mentioning he'd like to do it, and I liked it so much
I tried to do it myself. I really would like to see more of Mr. Whelan's
work some time (large, not the tiny things he has up now).

As for the heightfield... I suppose we could do with lower resolution and
make up with proper texturing. I posted my code in p.i.b yesterday, have a
look at it.

Post a reply to this message

Tony[B] wrote:

> Jaime should be putting it up on his site soon... or maybe we will need to
> ask Mr. Whelan first. I don't know. 


Maybe I should moderate what I said.  If it's just inspiration (same
kind of mood, same theme,...), there's no problem.  If it's a straight
remake, you could say that it's for "study" purposes, but, then, it
should be clearly labelled as such, and not be published on the web.

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message

Fabien Mosen wrote:

> Tony[B] wrote:
> 
>> Jaime should be putting it up on his site soon... or maybe we will need
>> to ask Mr. Whelan first. I don't know.
> 
> 
> Maybe I should moderate what I said.  If it's just inspiration (same
> kind of mood, same theme,...), there's no problem.  If it's a straight
> remake, you could say that it's for "study" purposes, but, then, it
> should be clearly labelled as such, and not be published on the web.

  No, Fabien, we talk (at least me) about the *original* image. Clearly, 
our work is not illegal as the original image is used only as inspiration, 
and the final image will surely not resemble too much the original.

  The problem is about publishing a hi-res version of the original image 
for everyone to have a reference. This picture is no more available at the 
official site at such resolution, and the FAQ on the site clearly states 
the images can't be published, except for scanned book covers. Seems that 
lately Michael Whelan reduced *very* drastically the size of the images on 
their site, suposedly because some people were stealing the hi-res images 
for ilegal purposes (entering contests, printing posters, etc...).

  The only solution I found to show everyone the original image (at a nice 
resolution), is to point to some other site (illegaly) showing it. There 
are several places on the net showing this image at hi-res, and linking 
them is not illegal, altough Michael Whelan seems to think the contrary 
(his statements are really restrictive, and he thinks that you are a 
criminal if you look at his images on ilegal sites).

  What do you all think? 

-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres

La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message

>   No, Fabien, we talk (at least me) about the *original* image. Clearly,
> our work is not illegal as the original image is used only as inspiration,
> and the final image will surely not resemble too much the original.

I though we were trying to get as close as possible. At any rate, Fabien's
suggestion is good: we could change the image just enough to say it is
inspired by, but not a direct copy of MW's work, so he doesn't feel ripped
off or anything. Let's discuss in what ways we could improve on it, or
complement it. For one thing, it's not entirely clear how the child got
there or why. I think we should add more people, and give something in the
image that hints to a way down there. We could have several folks with lamps
like that, looking for someone/something.

>   The only solution I found to show everyone the original image (at a nice
> resolution), is to point to some other site (illegaly) showing it.
>   What do you all think?

What if we only show certain areas of the image at high-res for reference?
Like the child, a few of the spikes, and one of the box-like sections
closest to the camera? The way Gilles' has "detail" images. I'll crop out
those and send them to you, OK?

--
Anthony Bennett

Post a reply to this message

"Jaime Vives Piqueres" <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> a écrit dans le message de
news: 3c37183d@news.povray.org...

>   What do you all think?

Just my 2 ?, but the best way to avoid any problem of this kind is still to
create 100% (OK, 75%) fresh material ;-)

G.

--

**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:

> 
>   What do you all think? 


Why not simply manually e-mail the image to those wanting
to participate ?

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message

What I thought when I first "broke down" the picture was that we would be
simply using it as a reference. I thought that the idea of the poles
protruding from the amazingly large walls, together with the possibilities
of several doors and windows opening from those walls were such a cry for
more objects/people/deliruiums that I simply didn't even think of just
recreating the original scene.

When I think of "gillestranesque", I picture much more than a boy holding a
pendulum. Is say let's crowd that space, kids!

Ruy

Post a reply to this message

Fabien Mosen wrote:
> Why not simply manually e-mail the image to those wanting
> to participate ?

  Even this is expresely forbiden by the FAQ on michaelwhelan.com, if you 
could believe it. I'm really with Gilles, about working on original 
material, now that all people know the idea (more or less).

-- 
Jaime Vives Piqueres

La Persistencia de la Ignorancia
http://www.ignorancia.org

Post a reply to this message

Jaime Vives Piqueres wrote:

> Fabien Mosen wrote:
> 
>>Why not simply manually e-mail the image to those wanting
>>to participate ?
>>
> 
>   Even this is expresely forbiden by the FAQ on michaelwhelan.com


Well, it's forbidden by law, in any case.  But, if it's just to show
the mood and style we're after, privately, who cares ?

> if you 
> could believe it. I'm really with Gilles, about working on original 
> material, now that all people know the idea (more or less).


Yep.

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message

"Jaime Vives Piqueres" <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> escribió en el mensaje
news:3c37183d@news.povray.org...
>   The only solution I found to show everyone the original image (at a nice
> resolution), is to point to some other site (illegaly) showing it.
>   What do you all think?
I think that is the only possible solution.
Search for pendulum
http://home.att.net/~hoo13/Whelan02.html

As I understand it, there is a general opinion to take this image as a start
of a project (even though we have a manger that will have to puntualize
that). I see no legal problem on it.
Where will it lead us?. You know it?; I don't.
Maybe we will have to discuss it, but in the meanwhile, why don't we start?
Bye
--
Txemi Jendrix
tji### [at] euskalnetnet
http://www.geocities.com/txemijendrix

Post a reply to this message

"Tony[B]" <ben### [at] catholicorg> escribió en el mensaje
news:3c36b9d9@news.povray.org...
> > OK, I'll need the image at a higher resolution (so you also like Michael
> > Whelan... great artist, isn't he?).
>
> I'm not an old fan of his, a friend just sent this one to me via ICQ
mentioning
>he'd like to do it, and I liked it so much I tried to do it myself. I
really would
>like to see more of Mr. Whelan's  work some time (large, not the tiny
things
>he has up now).

In his web he says he´s going to put high-res images back. Till then, you
can try the link provided in my last post.

> As for the heightfield... I suppose we could do with lower resolution and
> make up with proper texturing. I posted my code in p.i.b yesterday, have a
> look at it.

I have looked at it and this is what I see:

1.- I'm rendering the image at 640 x 480, AA 0.3, render priority highest,
no other program running. It goes on 45% at the moment and it has been
rendering 7 h, 37 m, 11 s. I think isos are too slow for the project, maybe
for the final render... I think we must try a heightfield of some kind
instead (image map, pattern, or so). [My PC is an AMD Athlon 600 Mhz with
128 Mb Ram]

2.- You have a good view of the left wall, but the right one looks like the
inverse copy of the left one (where white turns black and viceversa). Is
that right? seems strange.

That's all.
--
Txemi Jendrix
tji### [at] euskalnetnet
http://www.geocities.com/txemijendrix

Post a reply to this message

> In his web he says he´s going to put high-res images back. Till then, you
> can try the link provided in my last post.

OK. Thanks.

> 1.- I'm rendering the image at 640 x 480, AA 0.3, render priority highest,
> no other program running. It goes on 45% at the moment and it has been
> rendering 7 h, 37 m, 11 s.

First of all, the aspect ratio is x*1.0, y*1.2. Secondly, I've been doing my
test renders at a much smaller resolution without AA.

> 2.- You have a good view of the left wall, but the right one looks like
the
> inverse copy of the left one (where white turns black and viceversa). Is
> that right? seems strange.

The one on the right is just a box with the texture heightfield, not an iso
like the one on the left.

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 6 Jan 2002 01:21:46 +0100, Txemi Jendrix wrote:

>As I understand it, there is a general opinion to take this image as a start
>of a project (even though we have a manger that will have to puntualize
>that). I see no legal problem on it.
>Where will it lead us?. You know it?; I don't.
>Maybe we will have to discuss it, but in the meanwhile, why don't we start?

It makes me think of a walled city that has been abandoned and all the houses
removed, of course the city was on a wall that's why it was a walled city. 

I'd like to do some modelling, but Tony tell me what to medel and I'll do it.

--
Cheers
Steve              email mailto:ste### [at] zeroppsuklinuxnet

%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee  0 pps. 

web http://www.zeropps.uklinux.net/

or  http://start.at/zero-pps

  4:48pm  up 97 days,  8:36,  1 user,  load average: 1.24, 1.17, 1.06

Post a reply to this message