funky mathematical thinking

[frenchkid]

hey
just put up an article by Jermie in the article section. I just wanted to know what you think of the traduction, it\'s proably going to be used for a big project and I need to know of any possible improvements. Thanks !!

 

[demonherald]

It\'s a little bit beyond me but as I figure it out it seems to make great sense...

keep em coming.

 

[Thecadian]

it looks okay but i cant understand it

i bet its really helpful though

but i just cant tell

james

 

[Khaylanis]

It\'s interesting in the field of 3d rendering, but I\'m afraid it\'s quite useless for mini painting, that is, unless you find a machine that mixes up your colours according to this formulas.

 

[dauber22]

1) The tranlsation seems to be just fine,

2) Whether or not its useful, I\'ve always found this kind of stuff fascinating.

3) Glad to see you\'re still alive and kicking, Frenchie. Hope school\'s going well.

 

[Modderrhu]

Originally posted by frenchkid
I need to know of any possible improvements. Thanks !!

Hmmmm, the mathematics is simple enough. The basic idea is that surfaces more perpindicular to the light source will be brighter. This is fine for non-reflective surfaces. For reflective surfaces, it\'s the position of the viewer and light source that determines how bright a surface should appear. In either case, the mathematics remains much the same. Similarly, the mathematics remains the same for multiple light sources.

How did Jeremie derive his formulae? Did he apply trigonometry, or use derivatives? If he is unfamiliar with calculus, I\'d suggest he learns a bit about differential geometry. Thing is, differentials make a model like this child\'s play, over any continuous shape of surface with any number of light sources. It\'s exactly what 3D rendering systems use.

 

[Xavier]

The article is not to hard to understand. Also the translation is very good. The only change I would make would be to change the word \"decadent\" to \"demented\" or \"warped\".

As far as the equation I think he is missing a variable that represents the reflective nature of the surface.

The higher the reflectivity the quicker the gradient transitions of from light to dark.

Typically a non reflective surface has an 80% reflectivity on the highlights and a 60% on the shades
A reflective material has a reflective surface of 90%-95% for highlights and 40% for shades.

 

[supervike]

I just tried to read it, but it gave me a flashback of frantically trying to get my locker open because Algebra class is just about to start, and there is a big test, that I didn\'t study for....

Oh and I am in nothing but underwear.

Math Phobia, anyone?

 

[frenchkid]

Thanks all !!
Xavier : change will be done
dauber22: Alive and kicking indeed, expect to see more of me next month, right now I\'m on vacations but staying in madrid with jeremie who as no internet accesse :cussing: So I have to use the horribly slow connection at work ( yeah on vacation but working...need the money )

vike: more article without any maths on their way especially for you


and the article was done mostly for fun

 

[Ogrebane]

I love it I will try it on two reflective surfaces and try different reflection coefficents to see what happen..... No I wont I will just go paint a mini.

Nice article tho I love this sort of stuff.

 

[hakoMike]

I\'ve studied computer graphics much longer than I\'ve painted minis, so anything that relates one to the other is great!

The really good painters here probably have an instinctual feel for how much highlighting to apply to a curved surfaces, but for me it was helpful to see the rate of decay of the lighting as the surface moved from normal to parallel to the light source.

Thanks for translating and posting it.