Welcome to Fractal Forums

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04cRjOTl_Qk

The forum user degobi and I collaborated on this video and we would love to get some input. I was testing out some changes to a GI script with volume lighting and Andy had an improvisational piano piece that fit nicely to it. Any suggestions for improvement?

nicely done! I like it.

why improve? anyway, you get what you deserve  :evil1:  :fiery: :tongue1: :
- there is no story. it's just a fly through a static object. needs more variation(?) or may be it's too long.
- the thing that we are following actually distracts from seeing anything else.
- I find the mood too dark (and maybe a little bit pessimistic). GI looks better when there is lot of light :).
- At some point I had to turn the music off.

... Or maybe I'm just jealous. lol!

it is nice, music is nice, for me the background is too empty...

Very impressive!  Congratulations!

Good feedback thanks - yes the background is too empty and its just a fly thru, but stories are HARD! Maybe I can find someone to write a storyline?!?! I always wanted to make a video of one of Weaver's tales.

nice reflective surfaces. The bit at about 2.00 then repeated darker about 2.20 is a great image

BUT except for the more distant shots, the overall fly thru speed was a bit too fast for my eyesight brain connection to fully appreciate the fractal formations on display IMHO  :)  Still gets a five star rating from me.

That's a great idea! :ok:

From the spontanous first glance, I like the backwards-flight most, that starts around 0:56. Dunno really why, maybe 'cos of the depth relation with fog in this sequence.

The actual fractal shape and reflections look great. The thing I noticed the most was the orange sky though.
Why does the fractal appear lacking in detail and mostly dark? Perhaps turn down the occlusion a bit, and add some gamma correction to the fractal lighting model. Remember that the whole area will be lit by that bright sky, so perhaps have another light opposite the current one with an orange tint?

Dave there are NO lights. lol What I mean is the background is the only lighting so it is ALL ambient (why there are no distinct shadows). I should have played with the material of the box a bit more to make it lighter. The lack of detail is a low iteration count so I could fire a bunch of rays per pixel. But your right my lighting model is WHACK. I love it for its simplicity.
vec3 LER=vec3(1.0);//light energy remaining
//...march loop
//...hit a surface so bounce the ray probabilistically
//the farther a ray bounces from a perfect reflection/refraction the more energy it loses
LER*=mix(material.diffuseColor,vec3(1.0),pow(abs(dot(rayDirection,perfectReflectionDir)),material.specularExponent)*material.specularity);
//...end of march loop
color=LER*BackgroundColor(rayDirection);//the final color is just the remaining energy of light * the background source light

...and gamma correction would help too :)

Anybody have any ideas on the lighting model? Is it too simplistic?

This is beautiful. :)

I understand this was just a collection of flybys that were put together in a single video, and each one had its unique qualities, but personally I prefer a continuous non-ending stream without "breaks" in the flow.  A couple of times it appeared to be repeating the same areas again.  But it was interesting watching the "box" fly around and even project light from itself.     :D