|
Buddhi
|
 |
« on: May 02, 2010, 12:12:08 AM » |
|
This animation was rendered using Mandelbulber 0.43 with Depth Of Field effect
<![CDATA[<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/GON_tie5MVc&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/GON_tie5MVc&rel=1&fs=1&hd=1</a>]]> |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Sockratease
|
|
« Reply #1 on: May 02, 2010, 12:20:31 AM » |
|
That was Wonderful!  I very much need to get a better grasp of this program  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Life is complex - It has real and imaginary components. The All New Fractal Forums is now in Public Beta Testing! Visit FractalForums.org and check it out! |
|
|
|
Nahee_Enterprises
|
|
« Reply #2 on: May 02, 2010, 12:42:35 PM » |
|
This animation was rendered using Mandelbulber 0.43 with Depth Of Field effect
.youtube.com/watch?v=GON_tie5MVc Well, it does have some interesting views, but.... I personally find it not quite "real looking" when things become blurry and foggy as they get very close to the view point. I can understand this happening to far-sighted people, since they have a problem seeing up close. But even current television shows and movies do not go that blurry when something gets close to the camera. And then there are the times that objects faded in and out as if a "fog" was rolling in with waves of thick areas. This happened several times during this video, especially around 01:05 and at 02:14 (within a few seconds either way). Was there supposed to be that much "fog" hiding objects off in the distance?? |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 02, 2010, 01:42:51 PM by Nahee_Enterprises »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Buddhi
|
|
« Reply #3 on: May 02, 2010, 12:56:47 PM » |
|
Well, it does have some interesting views, but....
I personally find it not quite "real looking" when things become blurry and foggy as they get very close to the view point. I can understand this happening to far-sighted people, since they have a problem seeing up close. But even current television shows and movies do not go that blurry when something get close to the camera.
And then there are the times that objects faded in and out as if a "fog" was rolling in with waves of thick areas. This happened several times during this video, especially around 01:05 and at 02:14 (within a few seconds either way). Was there supposed to be that much "fog" hiding objects off in the distance??
I know that it looks artificially and adjustment o focus and fog is not perfect. It looks like it was camera with macro lenses with poor auto-focus  . Focus and fog distance was calculated automatically according to estimated distance. In future when I add key-framing to my program everything could be adjustable by user. But this is very long way... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Rathinagiri
|
|
« Reply #4 on: May 02, 2010, 01:33:38 PM » |
|
Fantastic tour! Thanks for sharing.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
hyperben2
Guest
|
|
« Reply #5 on: May 02, 2010, 04:50:44 PM » |
|
At the end, it's like star wars but as if the pilot feels a little drunk...
There's a strange detail I noticed in all animations trough mandelboxes, bulbs and other : shadows are strangely moving, as if the spots follows exactly camera path and adjust constantly lights angles. Fishy !
nice trip, however...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
reesej2
Guest
|
|
« Reply #6 on: May 02, 2010, 10:08:20 PM » |
|
Very nice. The DOF effect certainly makes it look recorded, rather than as though we're actually hurtling through the Mandelbox. But at the same time, it gives a better impression of size. In this, it feels like the Mandelbox is a small object that we're examining, instead of some planet-sized structure. It's pretty cool.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Nahee_Enterprises
|
|
« Reply #7 on: May 03, 2010, 02:38:53 PM » |
|
I know that it looks artificially and adjustment o focus and fog is not perfect. It looks like it was camera with macro lenses with poor auto-focus . Focus and fog distance was calculated automatically according to estimated distance. In future when I add key-framing to my program everything could be adjustable by user. But this is very long way... OK... I had just wondered if this animation was intended that way, but now I see you were testing it out to find the capabilities of your recent enhancements. I do like what will be available in the way of adding "fog" to these videos. It will be interesting to see how much control the user will have over the various settings, especially the ones concerning focus. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Hamilton
|
|
« Reply #8 on: May 03, 2010, 11:29:21 PM » |
|
This animation was rendered using Mandelbulber 0.43 with Depth Of Field effect
Very impressive Buddhi, congrats! Just wondering, why do we have the impression that the main light source is not static? I noticed moving shadows in sync with the camera movements... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
reesej2
Guest
|
|
« Reply #9 on: May 05, 2010, 04:56:46 PM » |
|
I can't speak for Buddhi, but my guess would be that the main light source isn't static. I would bet that it's following the camera--since the camera is going all over the place inside the Mandelbox, a static light source would probably leave the camera in dark patches all the time.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Buddhi
|
|
« Reply #10 on: May 05, 2010, 05:56:41 PM » |
|
This animation was rendered using Mandelbulber 0.43 with Depth Of Field effect
Very impressive Buddhi, congrats! Just wondering, why do we have the impression that the main light source is not static? I noticed moving shadows in sync with the camera movements... I can't speak for Buddhi, but my guess would be that the main light source isn't static. I would bet that it's following the camera--since the camera is going all over the place inside the Mandelbox, a static light source would probably leave the camera in dark patches all the time.
You are right. Light source was not static. It rotates and moving with camera, because inside Mandelbox with static light will be completely dark. I know that it looks not so realistic but now I don't have better idea how to use light source in animation. Maybe it will be better with many lights "installed" inside Mandelbox. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 05, 2010, 06:27:33 PM by Buddhi »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Hamilton
|
|
« Reply #11 on: May 05, 2010, 06:05:41 PM » |
|
Yup, that's what I thought too.  But I think it could be interesting not to always have a light attached to the camera, especially if one of the next releases of the program features a bunch of additional randomly-distributed light sources. IMHO, it could be a simple switch, enabled/disabled. Then, when disabled, we could get an even more dramatic or artistic lighting (e.g. chiaroscuro) during animations. Thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
April 22, 2010, 05:05:11 AM
Dilber MC Theme by HarzeM