 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Here is my attempt at improving bump maps. As you can see the results
appear to be the same. Anyone have any ideas?
Stefan
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'test_bump.jpg' (37 KB)
Preview of image 'test_bump.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I don't know Stefan!
I did a simple test and it works fine.
In the example, the right cube has a bump size and Z-scaling of 1.0
the left cube has a bump size of 100.0. Alternatively, you can also scale Z
to 100.0 with the same result! Or both, again with identical result. This
seems the "deepest" bump you can get.
Thomas de GRoot
<Stefan Sobol> schreef in bericht
news:ou5qguk5r1k2rr0bepg4j4hkheiu4i2lre@4ax.com...
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'test.jpg' (24 KB)
Preview of image 'test.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas,
Can you send me the model file you used to make the picture? I'd like
to try it myself. Maybe I can see the difference between your test and
mine.
Thanks,
Stefan
sso### [at] aol com
On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 08:41:22 +0200, "Thomas de Groot"
<t.d### [at] internlnet> wrote:
>I don't know Stefan!
>I did a simple test and it works fine.
>In the example, the right cube has a bump size and Z-scaling of 1.0
>the left cube has a bump size of 100.0. Alternatively, you can also scale Z
>to 100.0 with the same result! Or both, again with identical result. This
>seems the "deepest" bump you can get.
>
>Thomas de GRoot
>
><Stefan Sobol> schreef in bericht
>news:ou5qguk5r1k2rr0bepg4j4hkheiu4i2lre@4ax.com...
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'test.jpg' (1 KB)
Download 'BumpMapTest3.mdl.dat' (3 KB)
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
