"Duncan Adamson" <dja### [at] docicacuk> wrote in message
news:3A83D12D.F5653BEE@doc.ic.ac.uk...
> Ryan Constantine wrote:
> My goodness,  I didn't meen to start a war.  I was only trying to indicate
that
> I felt there are already many sources of image map pictures out there in
any
> format you could possibly want.  However I have had no such joy in finding
large
> sources of procedural textures.  This was the idea behind my site.

  Wasn't trying to war, simply trying to answer why some prefer one over
another.. :-)

> Personally I use both but prefer procedural textures.  I think they show
higher
> skill (but this is ONLY my opinion).  Image maps are useful when you have
little
> time or want to model an extremely complex texture.  However I am
explicitly
> looking to create a site for new users (and more experienced ones if they
like -
> no discrimination) to learn about procedural textures as this is the part
of
> creating scenes that I find the hardest.  Several tutorials exist on the
web but
> that is no use if you want ideas on how to texture a [insert object of
your
> choice].

  Depends on how you create it.  Some of the best textures I've ever seen
whilst lurking are usually a imagemap/bumpmap combo, which they do from
scratch.

> If enough people feel strongly enough about it I will add a section to my
site
> containing image maps - they are a valid tool in POV-Ray so I don't see
why they
> shouldn't be used.

    Depends on what kind of site you want, really.  If you want a popular,
all around good resource for textures, then yes, you should have both.  Yer
sight, ta heck with what others think.. :-)  But it'd be more popular if
it's method agnostic I'd think..

Post a reply to this message