I'm working on a raytracer for my computer science 657 class. Supports the basics: spheres, cylinders, triangles, cones, reflection, refraction, phong lighting, point lights, etc. For the creative part, I added a depth of field effect.
And I posted about 30 seconds before your comment, you LJ hawk. :P
hiretsukan
on Sep 12, 2004
Shiney.
Depth of field looks a little odd, though.
aegisknight
on Sep 12, 2004
Can you be more specific?
hiretsukan
on Sep 13, 2004
Mainly the ones that are close to the camera... looks more like fur or something than depth of field.
lordgalbalan
on Sep 13, 2004
...The distant objects seems to loom over the foreground objects. ...I can't get a good perception of depth from the images.
Good start though! :)
aegisknight
on Sep 13, 2004
That's because blur is simulated by sampling N times per pixel. It takes forever with an N == 256 or so that you need for a really good images, I used N == 20 or something. That's why it's a bit noisy.
aegisknight
on Sep 13, 2004
Good start? I'm done! ;)
sorcy7
on Sep 13, 2004
Jesus Christ, now this - ROCKS! You'll have to teach me that stuff some day ;O
elfric
on Sep 13, 2004
Neat! I've always liked ray-tracing. =)
naruto_nerd
on Sep 13, 2004
hehehe that's really cool! Too bad I'm not in the class~ T_T Lou told me the algorithms are mad hard to chew on.
aegisknight
on Sep 13, 2004
You should take it some time if you're comfortable with vector math! I'm sure you'd come up with some really awesome stuff.
bssnchica
on Sep 14, 2004
And yet, the lj-cut has since disappeared...?
aegisknight
on Sep 14, 2004
It doesn't validate on my web site, so I took it out.
tadan
on Sep 14, 2004
Rad! I think you should reward yourself for all your hard effort by buying a whole bunch of EBM. Like, you know, more than you already are.
follow on Mastodon
follow with Feedly
RSS for the rest
dude....lj-cut
Yeah, I did that right after I posted.
And I posted about 30 seconds before your comment, you LJ hawk. :P
Shiney.
Depth of field looks a little odd, though.
Can you be more specific?
Mainly the ones that are close to the camera... looks more like fur or something than depth of field.
...The distant objects seems to loom over the foreground objects. ...I can't get a good perception of depth from the images.
Good start though! :)
That's because blur is simulated by sampling N times per pixel. It takes forever with an N == 256 or so that you need for a really good images, I used N == 20 or something. That's why it's a bit noisy.
Good start? I'm done! ;)
Jesus Christ, now this - ROCKS! You'll have to teach me that stuff some day ;O
Neat! I've always liked ray-tracing. =)
hehehe that's really cool! Too bad I'm not in the class~ T_T Lou told me the algorithms are mad hard to chew on.
You should take it some time if you're comfortable with vector math! I'm sure you'd come up with some really awesome stuff.
And yet, the lj-cut has since disappeared...?
It doesn't validate on my web site, so I took it out.
Rad! I think you should reward yourself for all your hard effort by buying a whole bunch of EBM. Like, you know, more than you already are.
back from google What is EBM? :|
http://everything2.com/index.pl?nodeid=114109&lastnodeid=704981 It's that crazy electronic stuff Chad's so obsessed with (for good reasons.)
What's with the second image, the object on the left is suddenly...??
That's my procedural shader. :) It just generates a color based on the position.