On 24-5-2016 10:41, Stephen wrote:
> On 5/24/2016 8:49 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> Before I am condemned to the stake, here are my latest results, using an
>> exr depth_map (attached).
>>
>> Two attached result images: SB_rockhead1a with, in the corresponding
>> section:
>> exr "Mapping_test.exr" gamma 1.0 interpolate 2
>>
>> and SB_rockhead1b with, in the corresponding section:
>> exr "Mapping_test.exr" gamma 3.0 interpolate 2
>>
>> The latest of course is what I want. I plead innocent M'Lord.
>>
>
> Change your plea to not guilty you are innocent. :-P

Oups, yes, that would be more correct indeed!

>
> I prefer the gamma 3.0 image.
>
> I did some experimenting with images and gamma using PaintShop Pro (does
> not auto gamma correct) and height fields.
>
> Changing the gamma in the image changes the position of where the detail
> is brought out. Or so it seems to me.
> If that is the aim then it is a bonus that it can be done inside
> Pov-Ray. Rather than using an external process that will slowdown the
> workflow.
>

Exactly. I prefer not to mess with external processes and in this case 
the final result can be controlled better inside POV-Ray.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message