"Jim Holsenback" <jho### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> "Bruno Cabasson" <bru### [at] alcatelaleniaspacefr> wrote in message
> news:web.4683a2416089feb3e8ba46670@news.povray.org...
> > Comments and advise welcome.
>
> I agree with the others. The one on the right is MUCH better. I think what
> sets it apart from the left example is the depth and shading. That is to say
> the other appears more flat-ish looking. Very nice job .... I'm staying out
> of the cloud business (I'm not worthy !!! (Garth sez to Wayne)) ..... you're
> doing a way better job than I could.
>
> Jim

Thnaks! It's still embryonic, and I have to persevere .... I'd like to get
in-fine a simple process (trivial would be better) and generic parameters
to define atmospheres and cloudscapes that look realistic, with at the same
time a good versatility and a good operability.

    Bruno


PS: I wrote Thnaks instead of Thanks, but it sounds funny to me. I keep it.

Post a reply to this message