|
 |
In article <3A3A75AB.C699C2C4@my-dejanews.com>,
gre### [at] my-dejanews com wrote:
> Aren't the bright spots "up" and the dark ones "down" ?
Nope. The bright spots are facing the light source more, the darker ones
are facing away from it. Try using multiple light sources, each with a
different color, and a highlight in your texture.
Or were you talking about the "brightness" of the pattern? Well, the
answer is still no. Only the change in the pattern matters. For example,
if you use a "checker" pattern as a normal, only areas along the edges
of the pattern will have any effect, the "interior" of the cubes will be
constant, whether they are "black" or "white" cubes. It doesn't modify
the height of the surface, it just modifies the direction it considers
"up" at each point. Since the "low" parts will have the same "up"
direction as the "high" parts, the lighting will be the same for them.
> 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 .
Yes, it's more typing, but that is how you do it. However, I suspect
slope_map won't do what you want, because you seem to need large, sharp
variations in height. You need to actually model the shapes in your
scene.
> 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.
Just declare the slope_map and use it in all the textures if you have it
multiple times.
> 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.
Well, that doesn't really mean anything...normals aren't "up" or "down".
Again, the normal feature is just a way to simulate the effects of small
surface variations. You need real geometry in your scene.
--
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/
<><
Post a reply to this message
|
|
