On 25.07.2017 05:13, omniverse wrote:
> Yoiks! Forgot to say what I was going to tell about before starting to wr
ite
> that last reply.
> I blame Stephen for making me lose my train of thought with that perfect
> metaphor about finding errors.  LOL
> 
> Sooo... bump_size 0.1, apparently that's too much. I tried 0.01 instead a
nd
> think it looks better. I realized the scale in the normal statement being

> MyRadius*2 is probably the equivalent of bump_size 4 even if starting wit
h 0.01.
> 
> Don't want to go into all that here but I recall many discussions long ag
o about
> attempts to keep things such as normal and media from scaling up or down 
with
> object sizes after placing the texture. Or just to be aware of the possib
le
> ramifications when scaling.
> 
> That aside, please be sure to read my previous reply about the other thin
gs.
> 
> Bob
> 
Ho, can you publish here the entire scene code of your version of the
scene? That would help me better to see the differences and to understand.

I admit, another problem I have, is based on the English language. Yes,
i understand it well, I even live in an English-speaking country now.
But I am not natively English-speaking. Reading all that English here,
causes a concentration problem for me, and I am always missing a lot of
things, not capturing them somehow. That is why I want to ask you all
here, to be patient with me. :-)

---
Diese E-Mail wurde von AVG auf Viren geprüft.
http://www.avg.com

Post a reply to this message