Hello! (my first ever post to this newsgroup!)

I've been playing with povray since version 2.0, but I've never really
accomplished much (sphere on plane, 2 spheres on plane, ball and cylinder on
plane, etc...), mainly due to lack of time. However, I'd like to start
entering the IRTC, and so I think I need to start generating more detailed
scenes :-)

What I'd like to know is how people go about constructing a scene (more
detailed than 'sphere on plane'!)
I'm aware that people may prefer different things, but I'm really at a loss
as to how I should begin.

Do you list the objects required for your scene, and then work on
constructing each object seperately?
Do you use a modeller for individual objects in your scene?
Do you use a modeller for the whole scene composition?
(If you do use a modeller - which one?)

I know that a lot of people just hand-code everything - if you are one of
these people, how do you go about the whole scene-creation process.

Thanks in advance, any help gratefully received!

Rik A

Post a reply to this message

"Rik A" <rik### [at] nospambtinternetcomnospam> wrote in message
news:3c57cd9f@news.povray.org...

<snip>

Hmm...

Wait for/seek inspiration - this generally covers the basic idea and general
composition.

Model scene element by element. Generally I'll get the background out of the way
before modelling individual objects. In general, I don't use many objects in my
scenes - often just a background and one central object.

Probably the best reason to learn some handcoding, irrespective of whether you
use a modeller or not, is to enable easy switching on/off of individual scene
components.

In general for individual elements, I'll have a good idea of what I want, but as
I write the code, I'll adjust according to problems/inspiration thrown up by the
proto-types.

Most scene elements start out fairly messy, but I'll tidy up as I go along.

Post a reply to this message

Rik A wrote:

> Hello! (my first ever post to this newsgroup!)
> 
> Do you list the objects required for your scene, and then work on
> constructing each object seperately?


Roughly, yes.  Some items just seem to add themselves at one point or 
another though.

> Do you use a modeller for individual objects in your scene?


Nope.  Although, my stuff is usually mostly CSG, so it's manageable by 
trig-and-error;  I don't expect I'd be handcoding bezier patches though.

> Do you use a modeller for the whole scene composition?


Nope.

> (If you do use a modeller - which one?)
> 
> I know that a lot of people just hand-code everything - if you are one of
> these people, how do you go about the whole scene-creation process.


I'll put generic placeholders (cubes, cylinders, spheres) and then work 
on the details of each individual element.  I usually put all my object 
in an .inc file so if my spaceship object goes from a simple gray box to 
a 5000 part CSG union, the main scenefile will not notice any difference.

If your scene gets complicated, this approach is better when it comes to 
comenting out parts of the scene, putting "/*" and "*/" around a single 
"object{ BigAlienMotherShip }" line is a lot easier to read, IMHO, than 
having five pages of green text scroll by.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   videotron.ca  */}camera{location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a orthographic}

Post a reply to this message

Rik A wrote:
> 
> Hello! (my first ever post to this newsgroup!)
> 

Welcome.

> 
> Do you list the objects required for your scene, and then work on
> constructing each object seperately?
> Do you use a modeller for individual objects in your scene?
> Do you use a modeller for the whole scene composition?
> (If you do use a modeller - which one?)
> 
> I know that a lot of people just hand-code everything - if you are one of
> these people, how do you go about the whole scene-creation process.

This usually very much depends on the scene, for example it's important
whether you have a real world object you try to recreate of you design you
scene from imagination.  

Most experienced Povers probably have a quite intuitive method of planning
a scene, but of course it's important to do some planning, to divide the
project into single tasks.

Working on different parts individually and putting them together is
usually not a great problem, Povray offers quite a lot of possibilities
for this.

What can be really difficult is planning how much time and computer
resources things take and knowing if a certain technique is suited for
creating a desired effect.  I think everyone has experienced this problem
in form of unfinished projects or scenes that turned out totally different
than they were planned in the first place.

And to give some real world examples, several "making of's" can be found
on Gilles Tran's website:

http://www.oyonale.com/ressources/english/index.htm

and some also on my own ;-)

http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/raytracing.html


-- 
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other 
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

Rik A wrote:
> 
> Hello! (my first ever post to this newsgroup!)
> 
> What I'd like to know is how people go about constructing a scene
> (more detailed than 'sphere on plane'!)

You decide what you want to put into the scene.

Then you figure out what objects need to be used, and where they are
placed, to create the objects you want.

You place the camera, too, of course.

Then you either type out the scene code (like I do), or use a modeler.

> I know that a lot of people just hand-code everything - if you are one
> of these people, how do you go about the whole scene-creation process.

I generally sketch out things on paper, so that I can get a handle of
how everything is supposed to line up.  I also create scenes and
objects that involve a great deal of math, in order to get objects to
join smoothly, and I have pages of notes, all full of sketches and
algebra.

Regards,
John
-- 
ICQ: 46085459

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran has a step by step description of the making
of his IRTC winner "the wet bird".

http://www.oyonale.com/ressources/english/mkofwetbird1.htm

-- 
Phil
Behold, for I am the keeper of the sacred coffee brewing method.

Post a reply to this message

Thank you all for your responses, especially the links to "making of..."
sites - very insightful!

Rik A

Post a reply to this message

> > Do you use a modeller for individual objects in your scene?
> Nope.  Although, my stuff is usually mostly CSG, so it's manageable by
> trig-and-error;  I don't expect I'd be handcoding bezier patches though.

So do you avoid using bezier patches completely, or do you use a modeller?

Post a reply to this message

Rik A wrote:

>>>Do you use a modeller for individual objects in your scene?
>>>
>>Nope.  Although, my stuff is usually mostly CSG, so it's manageable by
>>trig-and-error;  I don't expect I'd be handcoding bezier patches though.
>>
> 
> So do you avoid using bezier patches completely, or do you use a modeller?
> 


Up to now I've stayed away from them as I alwasy managed to achieve what 
I want with CSG.

I do have Hamapatch lying around somewhere, just in case...

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   videotron.ca  */}camera{location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a orthographic}

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 30 Jan 2002 08:07:37 -0500, Francois Labreque wrote:
> Nope.  Although, my stuff is usually mostly CSG, so it's manageable by 
> trig-and-error;  I don't expect I'd be handcoding bezier patches though.

Whyever not?  (See below)

-- 
#macro R(P)z+_(P)_(P)_(P+1)_(P+1)+z#end#macro Q(C,T)bicubic_patch{type 1u_steps
6v_steps 6R(1)R(3)R(5)R(7)pigment{rgb z}}#end#macro _(Y)#local X=asc(substr(C,Y
,1))-65;<T+mod(X,4)div(X,4)9>-2#end#macro O(T)Q("ABEFUQWS",T)Q("WSXTLOJN",T)#
end O(0)O(3)Q("JNKLCGCD",0)light_source{x 1}// ron### [at] povrayorg

Post a reply to this message

Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
: Whyever not?  (See below)

  Not everyone is such a harcore povrayer as you are. ;)
  (Wasn't it you who got the most points in my hardcore povrayer test?-)
Perhaps I should update it and post it again somewhere.)

-- 
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> 
> Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
> : Whyever not?  (See below)
> 
>   Not everyone is such a harcore povrayer as you are. ;)

Sure, math/programming freaks-of-nature like you and Ron can do it, but
there is more to being a hardcore POV-Ray user than that.

-- 
Ken Tyler

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 31 Jan 2002 18:04:34 -0800, Ken wrote:
> 
> 
> Warp wrote:
>> 
>> Ron Parker <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote:
>> : Whyever not?  (See below)
>> 
>>   Not everyone is such a harcore povrayer as you are. ;)
> 
> Sure, math/programming freaks-of-nature like you and Ron can do it, but
> there is more to being a hardcore POV-Ray user than that.

The thing is, bicubic patches have gotten a bad rap.  Once you've played
with a few, you can easily visualize what a given set of control points 
will produce.  Granted, it's not always easy to keep track of sixteen 
control points in your head, but there are usually constraints in a given
scene that mean you don't have to keep track of that many points anyway.
For example, the RP in the signature I sometimes use (not this one, though)
is constrained to have each row of control points perpendicular to a 
stroke all be coplanar, and in a fixed relationship with each other.  The
two "outer" control points in a row are moveable, but the two "inner" control
points are constrained to be the same as the adjacent outer point but with a
different Z coordinate (this makes a roughly semi-elliptical cross-section.)  
That means I only have to keep track of 8 points for each patch, and those 8 
points are somewhat independent: I really only keep track of the control 
points for two independent bezier curves for each of three patches, and 
anybody can do that.  All that remains is to lay out the curves I want on 
a piece of graph paper and transfer the coordinates into POV.

--
#macro R(L P)sphere{L __}cylinder{L P __}#end#macro P(_1)union{R(z+_ z)R(-z _-z)
R(_-z*3_+z)torus{1__ clipped_by{plane{_ 0}}}translate z+_1}#end#macro S(_)9-(_1-
_)*(_1-_)#end#macro Z(_1 _ __)union{P(_)P(-_)R(y-z-1_)translate.1*_1-y*8pigment{
rgb<S(7)S(5)S(3)>}}#if(_1)Z(_1-__,_,__)#end#end Z(10x*-2,.2)camera{rotate x*90}

Post a reply to this message

"Ron Parker" <ron### [at] povrayorg> wrote in message
news:slr### [at] fwicom...
>
> two "outer" control points in a row are moveable, but the two "inner"
control
> points are constrained to be the same as the adjacent outer point but with
a
> different Z coordinate (this makes a roughly semi-elliptical
cross-section.)

As I look at which group I've landed in... newusers it seems.

I understood that, almost.  I've only tried a waving flag before using
bicubic_patch and then uv mapping an image onto it, just to see if I could.
The difficulties I see with those is the multiple patches stuff, tying it
all together.  Something to try more of someday.

bob h

Post a reply to this message