On 11-8-2014 6:33, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Hmm. Haven't commented on this prior, but.. the walls are too
> artificial. While its a good look, walls don't peel quite like that,
> which I think if the problem. There would be color differences in the
> paint itself, lighted in "protected" spots, and discolored in others.
> Their might be bleed through of texture from individual panels (if wall
> board), or other materials, where the same disruptions that peeled the
> paint has warped the underlying material. Also, more protected areas may
> be less patchy, due to be less exposed to the conditions that caused the
> peel, and others might have much bigger patches missing, due to being
> more exposed to the same.

Compare to the original photograph: 
http://www.daanoe.nl/en/photos#.U-htPGPJAQg

I partly agree with you but the intention was to try to approach as much 
as possible real life. I think I got close :-)

Otoh though, real life is /not/ the ultimate goal in my work ;-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Following Patrick's comments I have been thinking about a couple of more 
'sophisticated' applications of my peeling paint macro (see p.b.s-f).

In this image, the superellipsoid uses a classic granite pattern; the 
ovus uses a pigment_pattern based on a granite pattern function; the 
julia fractal uses the latter in combination with a proximity pattern.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'peeling_test.png' (379 KB)

Preview of image 'peeling_test.png'

On 8/11/2014 12:28 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 11-8-2014 6:33, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> Hmm. Haven't commented on this prior, but.. the walls are too
>> artificial. While its a good look, walls don't peel quite like that,
>> which I think if the problem. There would be color differences in the
>> paint itself, lighted in "protected" spots, and discolored in others.
>> Their might be bleed through of texture from individual panels (if wall
>> board), or other materials, where the same disruptions that peeled the
>> paint has warped the underlying material. Also, more protected areas may
>> be less patchy, due to be less exposed to the conditions that caused the
>> peel, and others might have much bigger patches missing, due to being
>> more exposed to the same.
>
> Compare to the original photograph:
> http://www.daanoe.nl/en/photos#.U-htPGPJAQg
>
> I partly agree with you but the intention was to try to approach as much
> as possible real life. I think I got close :-)
>
> Otoh though, real life is /not/ the ultimate goal in my work ;-)
>
> Thomas
>
Hmm. Yeah, can see that. I would, based on the original, if the goal 
"was" to match it, "A good start". But, yeah, the one obvious thing 
missing is the "hanging" bits, where its still peeling, for one. Your 
version, I suppose, looks more like what someone might get is being real 
careful about scraping those bits off, to leave a smooth surface. I was 
right about the greater variations of discoloration though. ;)

For me, frankly, it would be. A lot of the stuff I do right now (and 
there just isn't a lot of practical ways to help it with POVRay) is for 
Second Life, when I do any at all. And, I seriously hate the lack of 
realism in so much of the stuff on there, especially when contrasted 
with stuff that "is" being done with high realism. :p

-- 
Commander Vimes: "You take a bunch of people who don't seem any 
different from you and me, but when you add them all together you get 
this sort of huge raving maniac with national borders and an anthem."

Post a reply to this message

On 12-8-2014 0:27, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Hmm. Yeah, can see that. I would, based on the original, if the goal
> "was" to match it, "A good start". But, yeah, the one obvious thing
> missing is the "hanging" bits, where its still peeling, for one. Your
> version, I suppose, looks more like what someone might get is being real
> careful about scraping those bits off, to leave a smooth surface. I was
> right about the greater variations of discoloration though. ;)

Ah! the hanging bits! That was my first concern (and my last). At 
present, I see no elegant way out of that issue. I tried to write a 
simulation macro but the results were horrible. Just as for peeling wall 
paper, I am afraid that needs to be modelled separately :-(

Discolouration is another brain cracker. I use a texture_map but 
obviously that is not the same at all.

>
> For me, frankly, it would be. A lot of the stuff I do right now (and
> there just isn't a lot of practical ways to help it with POVRay) is for
> Second Life, when I do any at all. And, I seriously hate the lack of
> realism in so much of the stuff on there, especially when contrasted
> with stuff that "is" being done with high realism. :p
>
That explains your comments :-)

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott <kag### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>  But, yeah, the one obvious thing
> missing is the "hanging" bits, where its still peeling, for one. Your
> version, I suppose, looks more like what someone might get is being real
> careful about scraping those bits off, to leave a smooth surface.

This was discussed a while back, and no good solution was found.

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott <kag### [at] gmailcom> wrote:

> For me, frankly, it would be. A lot of the stuff I do right now (and
> there just isn't a lot of practical ways to help it with POVRay) is for
> Second Life, when I do any at all. And, I seriously hate the lack of
> realism in so much of the stuff on there, especially when contrasted
> with stuff that "is" being done with high realism. :p
>

There are still people on Second Life? (although there are people saying the
same thing about Povray!).

Do you have examples of what you're talking about in Second Life?


Also, I find this amusing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrAHBk4ZAeQ

Post a reply to this message

On 8/12/2014 1:54 PM, jhu wrote:
> Patrick Elliott <kag### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>
>> For me, frankly, it would be. A lot of the stuff I do right now (and
>> there just isn't a lot of practical ways to help it with POVRay) is for
>> Second Life, when I do any at all. And, I seriously hate the lack of
>> realism in so much of the stuff on there, especially when contrasted
>> with stuff that "is" being done with high realism. :p
>>
>
> There are still people on Second Life? (although there are people saying the
> same thing about Povray!).
>
> Do you have examples of what you're talking about in Second Life?
>
>
> Also, I find this amusing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrAHBk4ZAeQ
>
Hmm. Well, some of the best stuff I have seen are from people like these:

https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/24073

They try for high realism, or as high as possible, but with the addition 
of funky elements, like having one chair leg repaired oddly, or other 
"ghostly" effects.

These guys do some real good stuff too.

https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/4427

A lot of things have taken off do to allowing mesh now, and some insane 
stuff was, and still is, done with "prim torture", also known as 
displacement mapping (or sculpties).

Also, the places made by "some" of the residents, and almost always by 
Linden themselves, can be just insanely detailed and amazing. One major 
part of the area I roleplay in is being remodeled (but not yet 
"public"), with all the new lighting systems, mesh, texture support, 
etc. in them. These people are.. still a bit out of my league, to say 
the least. lol

-- 
Commander Vimes: "You take a bunch of people who don't seem any 
different from you and me, but when you add them all together you get 
this sort of huge raving maniac with national borders and an anthem."

Post a reply to this message

On 8/12/2014 1:54 PM, jhu wrote:
> There are still people on Second Life? (although there are people saying the
> same thing about Povray!).
>

Oh, and yeah, because a) all the others out there have either failed, 
been found to be stealing, or allowing stealing, or just flat suck (and 
many of them are based on the open source version of Second Life).

Also, apparently Linden has gotten the clue that a lot of their original 
design was.. problematic, and needs to be reworked, to continue 
improving things, so a Second Life 2.0 is in the works. About damn time 
too.. If they had waited too much longer "someone" might have actually 
managed to blow their current system out of the water. There are.. 
interesting things coming out, but, mostly in the "pure game" market, 
and without the versatility that SL provided in terms of pure ability to 
build what ever you wanted in it.

-- 
Commander Vimes: "You take a bunch of people who don't seem any 
different from you and me, but when you add them all together you get 
this sort of huge raving maniac with national borders and an anthem."

Post a reply to this message

On 8/12/2014 8:35 AM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> Patrick Elliott <kag### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>>   But, yeah, the one obvious thing
>> missing is the "hanging" bits, where its still peeling, for one. Your
>> version, I suppose, looks more like what someone might get is being real
>> careful about scraping those bits off, to leave a smooth surface.
>
> This was discussed a while back, and no good solution was found.
>
>
Had a thought on this.. Modifying the texture so you have, basically, a 
white line that produces a hard transition to a height field, right 
along the point of delineation between the peeled and non-peeled parts 
would give you at least a start point, right? You would then have a sort 
of "punch through" effect, where there is a ridge of material, all 
around the point of transition. The problem then is doing something else 
to the resulting height field so that its not a solid outline, but has a 
more random "hang" and gaps in it, then... texturing gets a bit funky, I 
admit, since you have to somehow get it to apply the right "underside" 
coloration to the inside of this punch out, and the paint color, and 
other variances, to the "outside". But, yeah, that is a tough one, since 
I am not even sure how to get past the, "Use a modded version of the 
texture to get a height field.", part. lol

-- 
Commander Vimes: "You take a bunch of people who don't seem any 
different from you and me, but when you add them all together you get 
this sort of huge raving maniac with national borders and an anthem."

Post a reply to this message

On the other hand.. Nah, that would be too thin and create possible 
coincident surfaces. Was thinking to make the height field "wider" than 
the hanging bit needs to be, then use difference to apply the texture to 
the inside and outside parts, and to get the right material thickness. 
Would, in theory, work, but, again, the material is so thin...

-- 
Commander Vimes: "You take a bunch of people who don't seem any 
different from you and me, but when you add them all together you get 
this sort of huge raving maniac with national borders and an anthem."

Post a reply to this message