|
|
On 29-12-2017 9:42, Jörg 'Yadgar' Bleimann wrote:
> Hi(gh)!
>
> Am 29.12.2017 um 08:51 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>
>> You are welcome Yadgar. Glad to be of help. I hope you will find what
>> you want. If there is something fundamental that I have learned since
>> I started modelling (with POV-Ray of course!) back in the nineties, it
>> is that for each scale you often need a different tool/procedure. It
>> is almost impossible to use the same output for a planetary view /and/
>> for a landscape. Both need different approaches.
>
> Not necessarily... at least when it comes down to heightfields. Of
> course, for an Earth-sized planet with a circumference of about 40,000
> kms, a decent looking heightfield without needing vertical exaggeration
> should be at least 400,000 by 200,000 pixels, the larger the better -
> but this full size is mostly not needed, as it is only worthwile at
> "pedestrian views" - and then you need only a tiny fraction of the whole
> planetary surface. Which leads me to the next question: Does POV-Ray's
> eval_pigment() also handle 16-bit grayscale pngs correctly?
>
I don't know about eval_pigment. Somebody else might be more knowledgeable.
I tend to disagree with you about those height_fields. A planetary
height_field used for a 'pedestrian' view will show horrible jaggies
imho. Or you will need insane resolution values if you are using functions.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|