Results 81 – 100 of about 480.
|
Search took 0.00 CPU seconds.
|
|
| |
|  
excellent, rendering
(score: 0.832)
|
|
 | | Re: Transparent colors in POV-Ray
|
| (...) I'm using 3.7 beta at the moment, because it renders considerably faster on my quad core. But the result is the same in 3.6. Thanks for that link, It makes the T parameter a bit more clear. I see now the trick is to use ONLY the T parameter (...) (15 years ago, 11-Jun-09, to lugnet.cad.ray)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.825)
|
|
| | More on MegaPov
|
| Hi all, A few days after my post about MegaPov 0.7 a new version was released, compatible with POV-Ray 3.5. So to a certain point that post was a bit pointless. I have downloaded MegaPov 1.0 (MP1.0) for both Macintosh and Windows but only tested it (...) (22 years ago, 3-Jan-03, to lugnet.cad.ray)
| |
|
excellent, rendering
(score: 0.777)
|
|
| | Re: How do I...? 3 questions about POV-Ray.
|
| Daniel, You can do whatever you want if you dare to edit the POV file before rendering. POVRay isn't that difficult to fafthom, and there are lots of things you can do that creates a better render. Like this: (URL) for example (I think I can still (...) (17 years ago, 12-May-08, to lugnet.cad.ray)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.762)
|
|
| | Opinions sought on rendering method
|
| I'm working on a different rendering method (for instructions) using POV-Ray, and I wanted to get some opinions about the output. On that note, I have two sample renderings in two different sizes, and I'd like to get people's feedback. Note that I'm (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.730)
|
|
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.729)
|
|
| | Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
|
| (...) I agree with Philo that the shadows are distracting. I don't think the stud logos are necessary, either. On the other hand, I think the transparent parts in the first rendering look a little too dark. There's also a grainy texture under some (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.729)
|
|
| | Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
|
| (...) - The shadows in version 2 cause color confusion. This is the most glaring example but it is repeated thoughout the rendering: the 1x2 grille piece is white in version 1 but looks grey in version 2. - No conditional lines rendered in both. - (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
|
| | Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
|
| (...) Good point. I think the official instructions are harder to follow now with the fancy rendering. Sometimes you can't tell one color from another, especially black, white, and the various shades of gray. I can barely tell the white bricks from (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
|
| | Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
|
| (...) To me, the reasons are mainly "historical": the first way to get better images than the output of Ldraw/MLCad/LeoCAD (which is not that bad for instructions!) was POV-Ray. L3PAO then LPub did a lot to push POV as the renderer of choice. Add to (...) (17 years ago, 9-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
|
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
|
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
|
| | Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
|
| (...) OK, I played around with this tonight for a few hours, and finally came up with something that I think I'm happy with. It requires 3 passes of the transparent polygons (just during snapshot save with SaveAlpha enabled), but it seems to get (...) (17 years ago, 9-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
|
| | Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
|
| (...) That isn't a silly question at all, really. In fact, it may be more important than all the flaws that have been pointed out. Based on the comments here, there seems to be a general consensus about a few things regarding "high-quality (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
|
| | Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
|
| (...) In my opinion, both images are unusable for instructions. Prefering legibility over realism (though a bit of "realism" is still needed to even recognize the shapes), I put down some universal rules for creating instructions of virtually any (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
|
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
|
| | Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
|
| (...) For me, the keypoint here is "for instructions". Anything that remove legibility to the image should be avoided. In both versions conditional lines are not rendered. Not a huge problem here, could become one on models with many rounded (...) (17 years ago, 8-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
|
| | Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
|
| Well, as of 0135 PDT, lugnet.cad.ray is at the top of the 24-hour column of the LUGNET Traffic Report (with 18 posts, vs. 12 for the next group). That makes me feel good. :-) (This is the only thread in the group that has had any posts in the last (...) (17 years ago, 9-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
|
| | Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
|
| (...) It'll be there in the next release. (...) Actually, if you look you will see that parts of it are somewhat transparent (like the left edge of the windscreen). All of it that has the background visible through transparent parts is supposed to (...) (17 years ago, 9-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
|
| | Re: Opinions sought on rendering method
|
| (...) I would choose LDView over POV-Ray and L3P in an instant if the -SaveAlpha option worked on my Mac. Otherwise, I think your conclusions about the appearance settings are correct. LDView renderings like your example look great. Would it make (...) (17 years ago, 9-Oct-07, to lugnet.cad.ray, FTX)
| |
|
rendering
(score: 0.728)
|
More: Next Page >>
|
