 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/20/2017 9:54 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
> "Ari" <win### [at] yahoo comhk> wrote:
>> Hi, everyone.
>> I have been spending time searching on the internet and reading your guys'
>> information. However, I realized almost all of them required "some mathematical
>> background", especially Voronoi Diagram being shown the most frequently. I try
>> my best to understand them but I can't due to the lack of Maths background(I
>> only know some integration/sequence and differentiation from classes :( ). I
>> then try to work with an external program but I don't how to make use of it
>> well. (I installed the pyvoro in Python) So, I just went back to the basic now.
>> ( Damn, I am stupid! Just want to cry in a corner)
>
> I think you'll be fine.
> A lot of stuff was thrown at you all at once.
> Voronoi / Delaunay is NOT an easy thing to do from scratch - which is why Sam
> Benge used an external program to generate his data set.
> Pov-ray's crackle pattern is essentially a Voronoi diagram, and you can use it
> to make a pattern, or pass it to an isosurface as a function, to get "real 3d"
> shapes.
> I'd start with the spheres like you're doing, and then you can get a working
> scene, and practice with POV-Ray's SDL syntax, and programming logic.
>
>
You know the differences in our outlooks on this problem are quite
philosophical. But this is not the time to go into it. There is no good
reason to. It would only be confusing.
> No worries - it'll be ok ;)
>
Yes it will be. :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Thomas de Groot
Subject: Re: Stacking stones without overlapping
Date: 21 Jun 2017 02:45:54
Message: <594a1622@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 20-6-2017 23:04, Stephen wrote:
> On 6/20/2017 8:57 PM, Stephen wrote:
>> On 6/20/2017 8:08 PM, Ari wrote:
>>> I try
>>> my best to understand them but I can't due to the lack of Maths
>>> background(I
>>> only know some integration/sequence and differentiation from
>>> classes:( ).
>>
>> You and me both. :)
>>
>
> So what I would do, knowing that most of the guys here have been using
> PovRay for years and they are wizards at maths and programming. Is to
> start simple then refine it as you go along.
> The image you linked to was by someone who stuns everyone with his work.
> So it is not a fair goal to try and do in a couple of months.
>
> If you look at the trace function it will tell you how far away an
> object is from a reference point. If you move that reference point in a
> regular scan. You can build up a pattern of spheres. When you are happy
> with that you can then add some randomness to what you are building.
> Irregular scaling of the spheres to be laid down to give the impression
> of stones. offset the trace reference point so the spheres don't stack
> up in columns etc.
> Then you will get ideas of your own to enhance it.
That is a good way to start. I shall have to try that scenario myself
too I guess: been years since I wanted to explore that path. :-)
>
> Remember us enjuneers have to make thinks work. And if it doesn't fit
> use a bigger hammer. ;-)
>
Not only enjuneers. Small apes like me too (using stones)... ;-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/21/2017 7:45 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 20-6-2017 23:04, Stephen wrote:
>> So what I would do, knowing that most of the guys here have been using
>> PovRay for years and they are wizards at maths and programming. Is to
>> start simple then refine it as you go along.
>> The image you linked to was by someone who stuns everyone with his
>> work. So it is not a fair goal to try and do in a couple of months.
>>
>> If you look at the trace function it will tell you how far away an
>> object is from a reference point. If you move that reference point in
>> a regular scan. You can build up a pattern of spheres. When you are
>> happy with that you can then add some randomness to what you are
>> building. Irregular scaling of the spheres to be laid down to give the
>> impression of stones. offset the trace reference point so the spheres
>> don't stack up in columns etc.
>> Then you will get ideas of your own to enhance it.
>
> That is a good way to start. I shall have to try that scenario myself
> too I guess: been years since I wanted to explore that path. :-)
>
If I can find the time I will try it in Blender. But the learning. :)
>>
>> Remember us enjuneers have to make thinks work. And if it doesn't fit
>> use a bigger hammer. ;-)
>>
>
> Not only enjuneers. Small apes like me too (using stones)... ;-)
>
[Top tip] Tie a stick to your stone. :)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 21-6-2017 11:40, Stephen wrote:
> On 6/21/2017 7:45 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 20-6-2017 23:04, Stephen wrote:
>
>>> So what I would do, knowing that most of the guys here have been using
>>> PovRay for years and they are wizards at maths and programming. Is to
>>> start simple then refine it as you go along.
>>> The image you linked to was by someone who stuns everyone with his
>>> work. So it is not a fair goal to try and do in a couple of months.
>>>
>>> If you look at the trace function it will tell you how far away an
>>> object is from a reference point. If you move that reference point in
>>> a regular scan. You can build up a pattern of spheres. When you are
>>> happy with that you can then add some randomness to what you are
>>> building. Irregular scaling of the spheres to be laid down to give the
>>> impression of stones. offset the trace reference point so the spheres
>>> don't stack up in columns etc.
>>> Then you will get ideas of your own to enhance it.
>>
>> That is a good way to start. I shall have to try that scenario myself
>> too I guess: been years since I wanted to explore that path. :-)
>>
>
> If I can find the time I will try it in Blender. But the learning. :)
>>>
>>> Remember us enjuneers have to make thinks work. And if it doesn't fit
>>> use a bigger hammer. ;-)
>>>
>>
>> Not only enjuneers. Small apes like me too (using stones)... ;-)
>>
>
> [Top tip] Tie a stick to your stone. :)
Tried that. Stick broke. :={
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Without really knowing exactly what I was doing, and just plugging some stuff
into the editor and changing some values, I got this in 5 min:
(many thanks to Mike Williams http://www.econym.demon.co.uk/isotut/
and David Wagner http://wiki.waggy.org/dokuwiki/povray/stainedglass)
#version 3.71;
global_settings {
assumed_gamma 1.0
}
#include "colors.inc"
camera {
location <0.0, 0, -5.0>
right x*image_width/image_height
look_at <0, 0, 0>}
light_source {<10, 10, -30> White}
#declare Packing = 1.3; //(increase to make more tightly packed)
#declare F =
function {
pigment {
crackle
form < -1, Packing, 0>
metric 3
offset 0
turbulence 0.1
color_map { [0 rgb 1] [0.99 rgb 0] [1 rgb 0] }
scale 0.25
}
}
isosurface {
function { F(x,y,z).red - 0.5 }
max_gradient 5.5
contained_by{box{-1,1}}
pigment {rgb 0.9}
}
Just needs some tweaking, colors and textures.
NO idea how to get the parts sliced smooth by the container removed, but I
supposed doing a difference or intersection with a highly textured box or
something might be a good way to fake it.
Sorry officer, there was no posted speed limit.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/21/2017 12:58 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Just needs some tweaking, colors and textures.
Not nitpicking, it is looking good. Is it possible to texture individual
components?
> NO idea how to get the parts sliced smooth by the container removed, but I
> supposed doing a difference or intersection with a highly textured box or
> something might be a good way to fake it.
>
> Sorry officer, there was no posted speed limit.
Sorry BE that excuse would not hold in the UK. Each type of road here
has its own maximum speed limit.
Built-up areas mph (km/h) 30 (48)
Single carriageways mph (km/h) 60 (96)
Dual carriageways mph (km/h) 70 (112)
Motorways mph(km/h) 70 (112
That is for Cars, motorcycles, car-derived vans and dual-purpose
vehicles. Other types of vehicles have different (lower) limits.
https://www.gov.uk/speed-limits
Of course stretches of road can have lower limits.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> Not nitpicking, it is looking good. Is it possible to texture individual
> components?
>
> > NO idea how to get the parts sliced smooth by the container removed, but I
> > supposed doing a difference or intersection with a highly textured box or
> > something might be a good way to fake it.
I think it _might_ be possible to do individual coloration, given that crackle
is based upon unit cells --- and I would imagine that if I give it some
additional thought, then the crackle function could be used to evaluate an rgb
color in the same way it's used to generate the F=0 for the isosurface...
I'm sure that Christoph L. or Mike H. might be able to chime in here, since they
seem to have a lot of practice in coloring isosurfaces with rgb functions.
I think the real point was that - there's _no math[s]_ in that there SDL.
> Sorry BE that excuse would not hold in the UK. Each type of road here
> has its own maximum speed limit.
That is The Road to Serfdom.
This is the Information Superhighway. ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/21/2017 5:17 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
> I think the real point was that - there's _no math[s]_ in that there SDL.
>
True but it is not layers of rocks and there are a lot of open spaces.
I don't think that it really fits the question. Although the true
problem is not properly defined.
>> >Sorry BE that excuse would not hold in the UK. Each type of road here
>> >has its own maximum speed limit.
> That is The Road to Serfdom.
No. The road *from* serfdom. We sent our serfs to the colonies. :P
> This is the Information Superhighway.;)
>
At least our cops don't shoot you for traffic violations. ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> True but it is not layers of rocks and there are a lot of open spaces.
OK, NOW you're nitpicking. ;)
> I don't think that it really fits the question. Although the true
> problem is not properly defined.
Well, I was thinking just that.
Here's a rock-wall building app that spits out a rock wall with the click of a
button...
(no, wait, that's so 2000's)
with the tap of a screen...
(no, wait, that's so 2010's)
with as request to Alexa...
(although 'they' probably have your whole psycho-social profile stored in the
cloud and know what your professor wants already ...
.... and so what have you really learned / accomplished.
In any event, the parameters of the project need to be communicated more clearly
and accurately.
Otherwise some wise-guy will post how to do it in 12 characters with a program
written in 'Jelly'.
Or Haskell :D
> No. The road *from* serfdom. We sent our serfs to the colonies. :P
Yep, and we partied like it was 1775. :)
> At least our cops don't shoot you for traffic violations. ;)
Seriously.
(though I could really read into that on so many levels)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 6/21/2017 8:07 PM, Bald Eagle wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>
>> True but it is not layers of rocks and there are a lot of open spaces.
>
> OK, NOW you're nitpicking. ;)
>
>> I don't think that it really fits the question. Although the true
>> problem is not properly defined.
>
> Well, I was thinking just that.
> Here's a rock-wall building app that spits out a rock wall with the click of a
> button...
> (no, wait, that's so 2000's)
> with the tap of a screen...
> (no, wait, that's so 2010's)
> with as request to Alexa...
> (although 'they' probably have your whole psycho-social profile stored in the
> cloud and know what your professor wants already ...
>
> ..... and so what have you really learned / accomplished.
>
Exactly! But here we would only give hints or techniques or maybe
pointers where some code was wrong.
ATM I've spent half a day trying to replicate it in Blender. I have
learned that its particle system won't do it. It will need to be a
ridged body system. But first I have to learn how to break a big stone
into little stones.
In this heat it is like:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5lYNgCVwFo
> In any event, the parameters of the project need to be communicated
more clearly
> and accurately.
> Otherwise some wise-guy will post how to do it in 12 characters with a program
> written in 'Jelly'.
> Or Haskell :D
>
>> No. The road *from* serfdom. We sent our serfs to the colonies. :P
>
> Yep, and we partied like it was 1775. :)
>
I'll give you that one even though it took you long enough to start it. ;)
To make sure I was thinking about the right date. I googled 1775 and the
whole front page was about a computer game. Sad the state the world has
come to.
>> At least our cops don't shoot you for traffic violations. ;)
>
> Seriously.
> (though I could really read into that on so many levels)
>
Indeed you could. But if you are the right complexion it seems you can
get away with murder.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
