Topic awaiting preservation: marblesV2 (Page 1 of 1)

image
source

what ya think?

Hey, that looks really cool. A few suggestions...

Move the light source a bit. It looks like it's really close to the camera, so the more distant spheres get the effect that they're light in the middle and fade to grey near their edges. I'd move the light source more up and to the right.

Maybe make the spheres a *bit* more reflective, they don't look metallic enough. You may want to add "metallic" to the reflection {} block (if you're using version 3.5; it won't work in earlier versions, they don't even *have* reflection *blocks*, just a number) which will change the reflection color to always be the color of the sphere itself. Also experiment with "metallic" in the finish {} block, that will make the phong/specular the same color as the sphere, giving it a more metallic look. That's optional. But i suggest increasing the amount of reflection.

Move the spheres so that they're not *right* on top of a line between a white and pink space on the checker pattern. Just push them a bit in the x and z directions, by some randomish numbers, like .3 or something. It looks unnatural the way they're on the lines.

Experiment with fog - look in the help files for "fog". It could make this scene look really cool, I bet. Try some ground fog to keep the sky visible.

Cool picture. It looks like like the first one I made... and probably inspired by the same thing =)

(edit: oh, you already had fog! try decreasing the distance. 2000 is sort of far, it keeps the horizon very visible, and plus the fog's transparency is .5. If I were you I'd try bring it closer, like 500 is what I usually start with, and decrease the transparency.)

[This message has been edited by Slime (edited 10-07-2001).]

thanks for the words, slime!

now lets go through that step by step:
.lightsource. i moved it from <10,10,10> to <10000,10000,10000> and nothing changed in the image. just the reflection-point in the spheres got smaller a little.
.metallic. yes, i modified the parameters of the finish block.
.position. i thought i already did so. but.... ok. done.
.fog. moved it to the front a bit.
.inspiration. hehe - im very sure about this!

image
source

Hmm, I notice a small difference in the lighting on the spheres that are farthest away. What I meant when I said to move the light source was to move it to, say, <10,10,15>, or something like that. You can move it away too, if you like.

What I usually do for light sources is this:

light_source {
<.5,1,-.5>*100
}

That way, you can specify the light's position in small numbers, usually between zero and one, and then just multiply by the approximate distance you want it to have (100 in this case). You don't have to do that, it's just the way I do it.

The spheres are better positioned now, I think, except for the one on the far left - it looks like it's *right* on top of a corner between white and pink checker spaces. Maybe you want it like that, it's not horrible. =)

I still think the fog needs to be a *lot* thicker (smaller distance). What I think you need to do is use it to get rid of the visibility of the horizon. Especially, because if you look at the "floor" way in the distance, it gets all weird looking, with little tiny dots of white and pink. Try distance 500 and reducing the transparency to zero. If it's too hard to see the sky like that, try bringing the "top" of the ground fog further down before you increase the transparency.

Oh, and at this point, you've modified the spheres' textures so much, you may just want to specify them yourself from scratch! (that is, without the predefined orange_glass texture.)

very cool, GRUMBLE.

My tip would be to increase the contrast of the image. You've got so much light in there that everything looks a bit washed out. Even though the 'sun' is apparently very bright, the shadows are very very faint, for example.

Dropping the reflection on the floor might help with this. Otherwise, you could just do a Levels or Curves adjustment in Photoshop.

slime, i will work on the fog.... youre right. its unrealistic if you can see the horizon.

das, i'll try your tips. another reason for this is the high reflection of the mables in V2.1.

i have just downloaded the new 3.5beta version of pov-ray and it gives me another picture when i render the same pov-file. i think its different with the reflection-handling as slime already said.

thanks for the comments!

I just rendered it in 3.5, the only differences I see is in the clouds (slightly different pattern 'cause the noise generator works differently, no big deal) and the reflection is darker. It may have to do with this:

pigment {Orange} texture{Orange_Glass} finish{ambient 1 metallic 1 reflection 0.4}

'cause pigments and finishes are *parts* of a texture, so it's like you're specifying some things twice; maybe 3.5 deals with that differently or something.

(edit: I found that this fog block worked nicely:
fog {
distance 100
color rgb <.65,.7,.8>
fog_type 2
fog_offset 15
fog_alt 5
turbulence 0.1
turb_depth 0.2
}
You may want to turn the turbulence up or something, it doesn't seem to be doing much.)

[This message has been edited by Slime (edited 10-07-2001).]

i also saw a big difference in the color of the spheres. they were more red than orange/yellow.

and the problem was as you said it slime. i replaced the pigment with a grayscale(white in the end) and got my fine yummy yummy orange marbles back.

i played around with the fog too. but i dont like it when it is so near. it covers the skies colors too much.

and i have added some smaller marbles in the back, which i absolutely dont like. i'll get lost of them... just thought you might have a look.

V2.2:
image
source

Damnit! now you guys got me started again! I started with grumble's source as a base and have progressed far far away from that image I too am having trouble with the skies. It looks to round near the top. Slime how did you do those bad ass 3D clouds a while back?

Oh and I'll post the picklater if its allright with Grumble since i did use his source to start from.

Schitzoboy

no problem there. if i wouldnt allow it, i wouldnt have posted it up. in fact im honored if someone thinks my source is that good, that he uses it.

btw: my source is a bad to learn from. it would be better if you define an object for the marbles and then use that one 5 times and apply a transform on it.

yes i had problems with the clouds too. they are different in 3.5. i actually got them from an article in the povray newsgroups.

Actually I did define some objects

Once I finish messin' around some more I"ll post it. Thanks grumble. Oh and I love Povray's new interface. Except for the corny music sounds, can I change those?

Schitzoboy

there are music sounds?

uiuiui - guess i have missed something *searches povray-folder for soundfiles...*

I'm having trouble with my FTP so i'll just post the source...its not *too* long

#include "colors.inc"
#include "textures.inc"
#include "skies.inc"


#declare myshape =
union { difference {
box{<-2,0,-2> <2,4,2>}
box{<-3,2,-3> <3,6,3>}
sphere{<0,2,0> 1.5}
texture{Orange_Glass} pigment {rgbf <1.0,0.8,0,0.9>} finish{ambient 1 metallic 1 reflection 0.05} interior { ior 1.5 }
}
sphere{<0,2,0> 1.5 texture{Aluminum}}
}

#declare bigshapeC = union { difference {
box{<-2,0,-2> <2,4,2>}
box{<-3,2,-3> <3,6,3>}
sphere{<0,2,0> 1.5}
texture{Orange_Glass} pigment {rgbf <1.0,0.8,0,0.9>} finish{ambient 1 metallic 1 reflection 0.05} interior { ior 1.5 }
}
object {myshape translate<5,0,0>}
object { difference {
box{<-2,0,-2> <2,4,2>}
box{<-3,2,-3> <3,6,3>}
sphere{<0,2,0> 1.5}
texture{Orange_Glass} pigment {rgbf <1.0,0.8,0,0.9>} finish{ambient 1 metallic 1 reflection 0.05} interior { ior 1.5 }
} translate<-5,0,0>}

object {myshape translate<0,0,5>}
object {myshape translate<-5,0,5>}
object {myshape translate<5,0,5>}

object {myshape translate<0,0,-5>}
object {myshape translate<-5,0,-5>}
object {myshape translate<5,0,-5>}
}

#declare bigshapeO = union {
difference {
box{<-2,0,-2> <2,4,2>}
box{<-3,2,-3> <3,6,3>}
sphere{<0,2,0> 1.5}
texture{Orange_Glass} pigment {rgbf <1.0,0.8,0,0.9>} finish{ambient 1 metallic 1 reflection 0.05} interior { ior 1.5 }
}
object {myshape translate<-5,0,0>}
object {myshape translate<5,0,0>}

object {myshape translate<0,0,5>}
object {myshape translate<-5,0,5>}
object {myshape translate<5,0,5>}

object {myshape translate<0,0,-5>}
object {myshape translate<-5,0,-5>}
object {myshape translate<5,0,-5>}
}

#declare bigshapeL = union {
object { difference {
box{<-2,0,-2> <2,4,2>}
box{<-3,2,-3> <3,6,3>}
sphere{<0,2,0> 1.5}
texture{Orange_Glass} pigment {rgbf <1.0,0.8,0,0.9>} finish{ambient 1 metallic 1 reflection 0.05} interior { ior 1.5 }
}}
object { difference {
box{<-2,0,-2> <2,4,2>}
box{<-3,2,-3> <3,6,3>}
sphere{<0,2,0> 1.5}
texture{Orange_Glass} pigment {rgbf <1.0,0.8,0,0.9>} finish{ambient 1 metallic 1 reflection 0.05} interior { ior 1.5 }
} translate<-5,0,0>}
object {myshape translate<5,0,0>}

object {myshape translate<0,0,5>}
object {myshape translate<-5,0,5>}
object {myshape translate<5,0,5>}

object { difference {
box{<-2,0,-2> <2,4,2>}
box{<-3,2,-3> <3,6,3>}
sphere{<0,2,0> 1.5}
texture{Orange_Glass} pigment {rgbf <1.0,0.8,0,0.9>} finish{ambient 1 metallic 1 reflection 0.05} interior { ior 1.5 }
} translate<0,0,-5>}
object { difference {
box{<-2,0,-2> <2,4,2>}
box{<-3,2,-3> <3,6,3>}
sphere{<0,2,0> 1.5}
texture{Orange_Glass} pigment {rgbf <1.0,0.8,0,0.9>} finish{ambient 1 metallic 1 reflection 0.05} interior { ior 1.5 }
} translate<-5,0,-5>}
object {myshape translate<5,0,-5>}
}

camera {location<20,14,0> look_at<-20,10,0> }
light_source{<10000,10000,10000> 1.8}

plane {y,0 pigment {checker color Black color rgb<.7,.7,.5> scale 16} finish {phong 0.8 ambient 0.5 reflection 0.7 diffuse 0.5}}

sky_sphere {
pigment {
gradient y
color_map {
[ 0.0 rgb<0.9,0.1,0.8> ]
[ 1.0 color MidnightBlue ]
}
scale 2
translate -1
} pigment {
wrinkles
turbulence .5
octaves 6
lambda 5 //3 to 6
omega 0.3 //0.2 to 0.6
color_map {
[0 color rgbt <1, 1, 1, 1>]
[0.5 color rgbt <0.98, 0.99, 0.99, .6>]
[1 color rgbt <1, 1, 1, 1>]
} scale <.8, .1, .8>
}}

fog { distance 200 color rgb <.65,.7,.8> fog_type 2 fog_offset 15 fog_alt 5 turbulence 0.1 turb_depth 0.2 }

object {bigshapeC rotate <90, 90, 20> translate<-30,7.5,-24>}
object {bigshapeO rotate <90, 90, 20> translate<-30,7.5,-8>}
object {bigshapeO rotate <90, 90, 20> translate<-30,7.5,8>}
object {bigshapeL rotate <90, 90, 20> translate<-30,7.5,24>}

Yes there are some funky ass sounds for when your image finishes rendering and when your push stop etc. They're all musical and crap and don't really sound right. I'd rather have more informative beepy kinda sounds.
Schitzoboy

[This message has been edited by Schitzoboy (edited 10-09-2001).]

COOL

really! the cubes look like bernstein. and the metal spheres fit perfectly.
keep up the good work!

Pardon my stupidity, but who is bernstein?

I did it with pov's new refraction. (at least I think its new) It's a lot of fun to play with anyway.

OOH! Looks like the FTP is back up, i might be able to post the image version.

Thanks

Schitzoboy

"Corny music sounds" can be changed in the Windows Sounds control panel. =)

I'm downloading beta 5 at the moment (beta 4 expired yesterday) so I can render the scene...

Are those windows sounds?!! I didn't know. I just got win2000 on this new computer and I had never heard THOSE sounds before. I thought they came with Pov. EWW nasty. I shoulda known it was ms's doing. The pic is up! BTW

<edit>Forgot how to use UBB code</edit>

[This message has been edited by Schitzoboy (edited 10-09-2001).]

They *did* come with POV-Ray, but POV messed around with windows a bit to get them in there, I guess.

"Cool" image... it may be a bit more efficient to first declare a block with a sphere and a block without a sphere, and then use those two objects to create the letters. Actually, maybe you did it that way and I didn't notice. Good job anyway. =)

didnt you see jurassic park?
bernstein is the material in what some fossiles are conserved. i think its coming out of trees.

Bernstein = amber

Emps


You're my wife now Dave

Ahh ok. Thank Emp I know what amber is Slime, you're right. Another dumb move on my part was differencing 2 boxs to make one box. I coulda just made one box in the first place that wasn't as tall. I cleaned it up quite a bit. and the source is a ton smaller now. Oh does anyone know how to get photons to work? I think i set it up right. I know its rendering them because it take loads longer to render but I don't see much of a difference.

Source

Thanks again
Schitzo

Much better structure in that source than the previous.

You're missing at least one essential thing for photons: in the light_source, you must say something like photons {refraction on reflection on}, otherwise the light won't shoot any photons. You may also want to raise the photon count. Also try decreasing the reflection amount of the floor, the reflectiveness of it may make it harder to see the effect of the photons.

In any case, I'm not sure if the effect of the photons will be very visible, since most of the shadows are behind the objects, and it's a very open scene, so most of the reflected photons will shoot off into space.

Oh, btw, you guys have *got* to try rendering transparent PNGs! It's sweet. Put this in an .ini file (such as POVRAY.INI, accessable through the Tools menu):

Output_File_Type=N;
;C Compressed Targa-24 format (RLE, run length encoded)
;N New PNG (portable network graphics) format
;P Unix PPM format
;S System-specific such as Mac Pict or Windows BMP
;T Uncompressed Targa-24 format
;
;
Output_Alpha=on

Wow that transparent PNG is great! I wish I could use it on the net. Then I'd just need one sig for the gurus and the asylum without woring about transparency. It works in netscape but not in IE...not even 6!!! Dammit!

Schitzo.



[This message has been edited by Schitzoboy (edited 10-10-2001).]

This beta just gets better and better!!! Look what you can do with those transparent PNGs. It only works in netscape though

Schitzo

And mozilla. =) Maybe Opera, too. Microsoft is stupid for not letting PNGs work.

The link as it is doesn't work in my Opera because of the JS. I might have JS turned off, but I'm too lazy to check right now. Then again, Opera does have JS/DHTML issues. So I ripped it, got rid of the JS, changed the Body, and checked again in Opera. No go. That pretty much sucks.

This has been a PNG in Opera public service announcement.



-schitzophrenia has benefits

Thats a shame Some really really awesome stuff could be made using alpha transparency, but its not worthu if only mozilla based browsers support it DAMN IT!!!

Too further digress from the original topic (sorry Grumble ) Are you going to make any more pov tut's slime? I would really like to see some that teach how to use POV but still give you a pretty picture in the end.

Schitzoboy

PNG images, of course, can be used for more than just directly putting them on the web. You can use them in Photoshop or Flash, or other things. Technically, you could do the two-sigs-with-one-image thing, only you'd really have two images, which you had generated from one photoshop file, simply changing the background colors in the middle.

As for the tutorials? Hard to say... I want to get more involved with GN, and get a little work done over there, but the truth is I really should be trying to get *off* the computer and get some work done. For instance, I have a differential equations assignment due tomorrow that I haven't started. Heh. =) Yeah, I'm going to go do that now.

Tutorials... *some* time in the future. Keep bugging me.

Tutorials? I've seen some good stuff here why not try a tutorial or two yourself? Slime's tutorial was the basic intro - why not expand on it explaining some of the things you've demonstarted here or some of the other things you are playing with.

For inspiration for more complex stuff have a look at the other tutorials around. I like the sky one here for example (and there are other interesting ones too):
http://free.prohosting.com/~olana/povray/povray.html

or look through a list here:
www.povray.org/links/3D_Tutorials/POV-Ray_Tutorials
www.3dlinks.com/tutorials_povray.cfm

Thats one of the reasons the GN is there - learn something, pass on something, learn some more, etc.

Emps


You're my wife now Dave

will i get a guru at the guru's network if i volunteer to write some povray - tuts?

GRUMBLE: If I understand correctly (unless you want a guru - which are in short supply) then you are already a guru you just need to write a tutorial to prove it. Slime's tutorial was a very basic one and your work on those marbles makes a natural progression from there (planes, textures, caera rotation, etc.). Schitzoboy's extension of that code would make a very good extension of the marbles work as introduces objects etc. I'm fiddling with heightfields and if I get that to work I'll knock up a tutorial. Hopefully it might inspire more people to try who might do something interesting and then pass that on in a tutorial. Anyway give it some serious thought.

Slime I'd also be interested in your sky - we need a good sky tutorial.

Emps


You're my wife now Dave

a good idea!
i'll hop over to the GN and see what i can do. thanks emps.

Yeah I agree with Emp, a cool sky tutorial (maybe one that touches on media for clouds) would kick ass. I'm looking forward to you heightfield one too Emp! I'll write one if I can think of one to write about. I'm about as new as they come to POV so I don't think I should write one just yet.

GRUMBLE: Spotted your message - explaining how you create the marbles shouldn't be too much hassle the trick is just getting things nice and clear. I look forward to seeing it.

Schitzoboy: As I said that extension of GRUMBLE's script does introduce some further important concepts and might make a good POV Ray part 3 - thoughts Slime?

I'd be more ahead with heightfleids but the GIS DEM I was given wasn't right and so I thought I was making an awful mess of things (so its been a little frustrating!!). For a couple of good overviews in the meantime (ones that I've been using as a guide) see:
www.travelnotes.de/rays/grandcan
http://ddl.jpl.nasa.gov/ddl/talks/viz

Emps


You're my wife now Dave

yes, spheres are not difficult and have already be explained by slime. im thinking of planes, basic-skies, fogs and maybe some more complicated objects. but lets discuss that at the GN.

Yeah, the second povray tutorial should cover more complex objects and more complex textures, to the point where people understand just about everything involved with textures and primitives. Maybe that can be two separate tutorials. But after that, we can get into the more fun stuff.

Slime probably has the best idea about what should go into one of the tutorials to balance progression with comprehension so whatever he says.

For those interested the thread GRUMBLE started is at:
www.gurusnetwork.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=12&t=000076

Emps


You're my wife now Dave