So, I have a two-fer:

I'm simply trying to model a cinder block wall that has been painted a fairly
uniform color.
Problem One arose when I tried to apply BRICK as a normal.  My
acceptable-for-a-WIP texture got fubarred and my walls all now have a banded
effect. (see p.b.i)
Problem Number Two is that I'd like to have the paint look like... paint.  So I
want the brick and the mortar components to have my paint definition.  Which is
a MATERIAL.   BRICK does not seem to play well with MATERIAL, and POV-Ray is
giving me the "number one" sign.

Which leads to my related question:
Is there a way to get the hierarchy of material, texture, pigment, color.... to
play well together?  What I mean is, if I define A = pigment {Red},
then it seems to me that I ought to be able to do the following:
This_Pigment = pigment {A}
That_Texture = texture {A}
My_Material = material {A}
because the pigment is a subordinate component.
It seems ... unnecessary(?)  to have to:
That_Texture = texture {pigment {A}}
My_Material = material {texture {pigment {A}}}
when the material and texture directives are merely wrappers that contain no
additional components.
I'm thinking these things ought to get automatically upgraded somehow...

It's tough to juggle these things and keep them all compatible with each other,
so I started to define everything as a material so I didn't have to keep track
of what was a material and what was a texture and what was only a pigment in my
object definitions.  Seems that's coming around to nip me.

Brick troubles:
================================================================

#declare White_Paint = material { texture {pigment {color White}  finish{diffuse
0.9 } normal {bumps scale <1,.1,.1>}} };

#declare White_Wall =
material { texture{ pigment {brick  //material {White_Paint} //  no likey
     //material {White_Paint} //  no worky
     pigment {Gray50}
     pigment {color rgb <0.96, 0.93, 0.86>}
     brick_size <8, 8, 16> }
     normal {brick brick_size <8, 8, 16>} finish {diffuse 0.9 phong 0.2}} };

Somebody please set me straight here.

Post a reply to this message

Am 28.08.2014 20:15, schrieb Bald Eagle:
> So, I have a two-fer:
>
> I'm simply trying to model a cinder block wall that has been painted a fairly
> uniform color.
> Problem One arose when I tried to apply BRICK as a normal.  My
> acceptable-for-a-WIP texture got fubarred and my walls all now have a banded
> effect. (see p.b.i)

You may need to rotate the pattern by 90 degrees about the y axis.

Post a reply to this message

clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:

> You may need to rotate the pattern by 90 degrees about the y axis.

No, that's not it.  I have the orientation of the brick pattern and the wall
face correct, since I had to make sure that was the case because I have
perpendicular walls, and the pattern had to be rotated for those.

When I comment out the normal section, I get back my bland but correctly
patterned cinder blocks.  It's rendered at +q9, so it's not one of those
low-quality effects that freak me out sometimes.

Post a reply to this message

> Brick troubles:
> ================================================================
>
> #declare White_Paint = material { texture {pigment {color White}  finish{diffuse
> 0.9 } normal {bumps scale <1,.1,.1>}} };
>
> #declare White_Wall =
> material { texture{ pigment {brick  //material {White_Paint} //  no likey
>       //material {White_Paint} //  no worky
Normal, you try to use a material where a texture is expected.

>       pigment {Gray50}
>       pigment {color rgb <0.96, 0.93, 0.86>}
>       brick_size <8, 8, 16> }
>       normal {brick brick_size <8, 8, 16>} finish {diffuse 0.9 phong 0.2}} };
>
> Somebody please set me straight here.
>
>
Try something like this:

material{brick material(material_1} material{material_2}}

Another option would be to use a tilign pattern.
the pattern tiling 10 properly scalled and rotated to be applyed on a 
wall seem like a good candidate.
It use a xx_map. It works very good as a bump_map to controll your normals.

Post a reply to this message

Am 28.08.2014 22:54, schrieb Bald Eagle:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>
>> You may need to rotate the pattern by 90 degrees about the y axis.
>
> No, that's not it.  I have the orientation of the brick pattern and the wall
> face correct, since I had to make sure that was the case because I have
> perpendicular walls, and the pattern had to be rotated for those.

It certainly /looks/ exactly like it needs a 90 degrees rotation about 
the y axis or some translation though, so you might want to double-chek.

Post a reply to this message