morph ball renders

2005-07-14 02:43:17 pm

red chamber dream

Yeah, the glow should definitely be brighter; I mean, in Prime, you can see the glow coming out of the "cracks" in the Morph Ball. This ought to be particularly evident in the Morph Ball on the right.

knighty

2005-07-17 05:25:27 pm

Obviously I lacked the ability to comment at scu....but now that I can, theyre awesome DJ. Theyre great yup. Good work budday Wink

supermpaddict

2005-07-17 05:51:57 pm

OOOOOOOOO, i need a new computer then....

USBCD36

2005-07-17 08:01:26 pm

That is awesome! I long for a desktop sized one, but when I get a new computer, the resolution will be 1600x1200. If that program is compatible with Mac OS X, then I could re-render it then if I had the source code. For now, 1280 seems to be the wanted size, but if you can't do it, I only have a 1024 pixel monitor anyway.

Maybe you could do a plain Phazon Spider Ball one until you can easily render the 4?

Phazon Eater

2005-07-17 09:13:39 pm

Freaking amazing DJ. Shocked

:P

DJGrenola

2005-07-18 03:45:49 am

Quote from USBCD36:

I long for a desktop sized one, but when I get a new computer, the resolution will be 1600x1200. If that program is compatible with Mac OS X, then I could re-render it then if I had the source code.

it is; POV-Ray (sharing an advantage of most open source projects) has been ported to every architecture under the sun.

I think I've now solved the problem I was having with the new lighting, so I just have to rebalance the scene with the new lights - I've also removed some of the unnecessarily reflective surfaces to fix a strange issue I was having, which also seems to speed up the render a bit. The thing which seems to take the time is the glass on the sides of the spiders (which has a genuine refractive index).

thanks again for all the positive comments.

DominicanZero

2005-07-18 04:29:44 am

直死の魔眼使い

Question, DJ: Does this POV-Ray has the basic include files that you included in your source? (I think it was metals and some other one, can't neither remember nor be bothered to recheck. :P) If so, where can I get this program? And also, is it hard to learn, like a design program, or relatively easy, like a programming language? (I ask this, considering that what I saw in your first post was almost a basic C source file. :P) I might be interested in rendering a few thingies myself too. :)

SABERinBLUE

2005-07-18 04:35:41 am

Cook of the Sea

Quote from DominicanZero:

And also, is it hard to learn, like a design program, or relatively easy, like a programming language?

Spectere

2005-07-18 05:08:33 am

If you need it rendered I'll donate my PowerMac. It'll probably take a while to render on there (it's only a 733MHz, and I'm not sure how well G4's compare to P4's with POV-Ray) but at least you won't have to work around it.

If you want, just e-mail me the source (spectere@gmail.com), let me know what settings you want to use (preferably, send me an INI), and I'll get 'r done.

DominicanZero

2005-07-18 07:02:35 am

直死の魔眼使い

Quote from SABERinBLUE:

Quote from DominicanZero:

And also, is it hard to learn, like a design program, or relatively easy, like a programming language?

Lol, s'up with that? It's true; learning how to create decent designs in graphic design programs (this includes 3D modelling programs) is MUCH harder than grasping the basics of a programming language, and building up your knowledge from there. Ask any designer and/or programmer ANYWHERE, and they'll tell you the same. :P

knighty

2005-07-18 07:05:43 am

It depends. Some people have a knack for understanding languages yet some are better at learning how to use modelling programs because they are more spacious aware, or have more experience in them. I don't think you can make a sweeping comment like that.

nate

2005-07-18 08:28:02 am

Quote from DJGrenola:

POV-Ray (sharing an advantage of most open source projects) has been ported to every architecture under the sun.

vdub ;_;

supermpaddict

2005-07-18 11:43:15 am

What iv vdub????

DominicanZero

2005-07-18 11:44:07 am

直死の魔眼使い

Quote from knighty:

It depends. Some people have a knack for understanding languages yet some are better at learning how to use modelling programs because they are more spacious aware, or have more experience in them. I don't think you can make a sweeping comment like that.

The key points being those bolded. If someone doesn't have a gift or naturality to use a graphics design program, you can be sure as hell they'd rather learn more easily how to create a basic arithmetic calculator in C than design a simple beveled text in Photoshop, for example. :P Meaning, the random John Doe out there is prone to more easily learning a basic programming language syntax than how to use a design/modeling program.

And on a more random note, is it modelling or modeling? I've never been able to figure that one out. :P

supermpaddict: Virtual Dub, the program Nate uses to capture recorded speedruns.

arkarian

2005-07-18 11:53:57 am

red chamber dream

Probably "modelling," in this case (the last entry). Can be "modeling," too, though, I suppose.

DJGrenola

2005-07-18 12:50:23 pm

@nate: there, there. it'll happen one day. oh, incidentally; it might be time to think about getting fink or darwin-ports installed, as when I was using the most recent avidemux2 to make that geo core video (on linux this was), I noticed something called "DGBob" in the filters list ...

@DZ: yeah I prefer programming languages to pressing buttons, although I'm not 100% sure about your analysis that this is the common view. POV's funny like that, actually: Most modellers use tesselation to build up objects, so if you want a sphere, it will build an imperfect one out of thousands of triangles. POV doesn't; it deals with mathematically perfect objects. So if you tell it "I want a sphere, centre <0,0,0>, radius 1", it doesn't approximate it to anything else until a ray of light hits it in the render step.

POV-Ray is at

http://www.povray.org/

and yeah, you get all the include files with it.

I recommend Mac users get the source code for the UNIX version (not the Mac OS 9 binary) and compile it. I can't remember whether the development tools (specifically gcc and make) are still a separate download from apple or not, but you'll need them to do it (they might be available from:)

http://developer.apple.com/tools/

or they might be a separate package on your Mac OS X install disc. Or, if you're using Tiger, you could just pester me and I'll send you my compiled version.

For learning POV-Ray, start here

http://www.povray.org/documentation/

and specifically here:

http://www.povray.org/documentation/view/3.6.1/13/

no doubt someone will be producing better renders than me within a week, as I only started about two weeks ago or something.

@nate: there, there. it'll happen one day. oh, incidentally; it might be time to think about getting fink or darwin-ports installed, as when I was using the most recent avidemux2 to make that geo core video (on linux this was), I noticed something called "DGBob" in the filters list ...

@DZ: yeah I prefer programming languages to pressing buttons, although I'm not 100% sure about your analysis that this is the common view. POV's funny like that, actually: Most modellers use tesselation to build up objects, so if you want a sphere, it will build an imperfect one out of thousands of triangles. POV doesn't; it deals with mathematically perfect objects. So if you tell it "I want a sphere, centre <0,0,0>, radius 1", it doesn't approximate it to anything else until a ray of light hits it in the render step.

POV-Ray is at

http://www.povray.org/

and yeah, you get all the include files with it.

I recommend Mac users get the source code for the UNIX version (not the Mac OS 9 binary) and compile it. I can't remember whether the development tools (specifically gcc and make) are still a separate download from apple or not, but you'll need them to do it (they might be available from:)

http://developer.apple.com/tools/

or they might be a separate package on your Mac OS X install disc. Or, if you're using Tiger, you could just pester me and I'll send you my compiled version.

For learning POV-Ray, start here

http://www.povray.org/documentation/

and specifically here:

http://www.povray.org/documentation/view/3.6.1/13/

no doubt someone will be producing better renders than me within a week, as I only started about two weeks ago or something.

nate

2005-07-18 05:30:44 pm

Quote from DJGrenola:

@nate: there, there. it'll happen one day. oh, incidentally; it might be time to think about getting fink or darwin-ports installed, as when I was using the most recent avidemux2 to make that geo core video (on linux this was), I noticed something called "DGBob" in the filters list ...

wow, sounds interesting. but with the immediate threat of the pc going missing passed, i'm not sure i could be bothered to install a bunch of stuff unless we've really got something potentially concrete. i guess keep me updated.

Quote from DJGrenola:

I can't remember whether the development tools (specifically gcc and make) are still a separate download from apple or not, but you'll need them to do it (they might be available from:)

iirc you just had to install the included developer tools. it's usually a separate disc inside the os x box, though my memory is hazy of tiger for some reason ... meh, it was probably the same thing, perhaps just on the install dvd (instead of a separate cd).

[quote="DJGrenola"]@nate: there, there. it'll happen one day. oh, incidentally; it might be time to think about getting fink or darwin-ports installed, as when I was using the most recent avidemux2 to make that geo core video (on linux this was), I noticed something called "DGBob" in the filters list ...[/quote]
wow, sounds interesting. but with the immediate threat of the pc going missing passed, i'm not sure i could be bothered to install a bunch of stuff unless we've really got something potentially concrete. i guess keep me updated.

[quote="DJGrenola"]I can't remember whether the development tools (specifically gcc and make) are still a separate download from apple or not, but you'll need them to do it (they might be available from:)[/quote]
iirc you just had to install the included developer tools. it's usually a separate disc inside the os x box, though my memory is hazy of tiger for some reason ... meh, it was probably the same thing, perhaps just on the install dvd (instead of a separate cd).

DJGrenola

2005-07-18 06:26:29 pm

@nate: bah. I am a total idiot.

provided you have the 10.4 release of X-Windows off the Tiger CD (it's one of the optional applications), there's a fully functional binary OS X build of avidemux2 here:

http://download.berlios.de/avidemux/avidemux_2.0.40_b.dmg.bz2

no compilation, no extra stuff to install (except X11 for 10.4), no hassle, no nothing.

USBCD36

2005-07-18 07:14:10 pm

I wish you had finished the code for the 4 morph balls sooner, because I was away from my home computer for about 2 weeks when it could've rendered.

Second, what do I do if I have a computer with OS X (10.3) and Xcode (the developer tools) already installed? Do I get the 10.4 compiled version (ie, will it work?) or should I compile it to run in X11 (X Windows System by Apple)? If this helps, I have KDE installed in X11

Third, can you post the data (or whatever it is) for the 4 morph balls the same way you did for the first and how to use it? I'd be willing to lend my computer to the rendering process too (it is a 600MHz iMac G3).

DJGrenola

2005-07-18 07:44:09 pm

forget I mentioned X11 unless you're nate. It's not related to the topic of morph ball rendering (I should have PMed that to him).

as for the rest, well, wait until I've got something to render.

Spectere

2005-07-18 07:47:12 pm

Quote from USBCD36:

I'd be willing to lend my computer to the rendering process too (it is a 600MHz iMac G3).

I have a 733MHz G4 that won't be touched.

I was going to compile the command line version of POV-Ray in OS X and just use that. I've done it before; it's really easy to get working.

I believe the only thing that POV uses X11 for is image display. GUIs on non-Windows systems are third-party efforts.

nate

2005-07-19 12:16:46 am

grenola: cool, i'll check it out asap. pretty sure i already have x11 installed and everything. i'll post my test encodes here so you can check them out if you'd like.

USBCD36

2005-07-19 09:21:07 pm

While playing Echoes earlier, my friend noted how cool the Light Suit morph ball looked. You should do one of that, it'd be sw33t and probably wouldn't take forever to render.

DJGrenola

2005-07-20 07:50:16 pm

@nate: showing me encodes isn't really necessary if it will be hassle, I'll no doubt end up seeing some of them on the SDA anyway. just hope it will be useful in some way.

@USBCD: I'll have a think about doing the light suit ball, but I'd like to try to move on to some in-game scenes from prime 1 now. I have an unexploded morph ball bomb half finished.

I thought I had the four-ball render finished after redoing the emitting media inside the balls so it would reflect correctly, and I spent 18 hours rendering it at 1280x1024 until it got to the phazon spider, when I noticed that the media inside the ball had screwed up again. >:( This was very annoying when I'm sure I did a test render with the same settings that came out fine. So I'm back to changing media pigment parameters and rendering previews at 160x120 ... bleh.

supermpaddict

2005-07-20 11:15:42 pm

Thx DZ, did'nt know he used vdub...