|
|
Chris Huff wrote:
> I suspect that you do not understand how the normal feature works.
It's possible.
> The "normal" feature
> generally takes a pattern, figures out how it is changing at that point,
> and modifies the calculated normal using this information.
Aren't the bright spots "up" and the dark ones "down" ?
> It sounds like you are looking for the slope_map feature, which can do
> some of what you seem to want.
I'd really like to have, as I said,
texture{
gradient y
texture_map{
[ n1 Texture_1]
[ n2 Texture_1]
[ n3 Texture_2]
[ n4 Texture_2]
}
}
Where Texture_1 contains normal{bumps}.
If I use a slope map, I assume I have the following problems:
1. I have to break normal out of the texture_map and instead use pigment_map
and a normal_map: more typing .
2. I'm frequently a adjusting n1,n2,n3.. etc. to get the right look: more
editing in two or three places each time, depending on how I set it up.
3. I don't understand a slope_map when I just want it all to be "down", or
like in the color_map, all black.
Is the suggestion that I define Texture_2 as:
#declare Texture_2=texture{
pigment{rgb ....
finish{ rgb ...
normal {
gradient x
slope_map {
[0 <-1, 0>]
[1 <-1,0>]
}
}
}
Hopefully annoying only by my ignorance and not by my disrespect or failure
to RTFM,
greg.
Post a reply to this message
|
|