 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sven Littkowski <jam### [at] yahoo com> wrote:
> Uhmmm, then how do I take off the red and blue channel in Photoshop
> (keeping only the green channel)? Never done before, either. :-)
>
If you really want to do something like that, here's how in Photoshop (I'm
using *old* PS v5.0) --
1) Look in the 'Channels' palette (in the main 'Layers/Channels/Paths' palette),
and decide which red, green or blue channel you like. (If your image is
grayscale, all the channels will be identical.)
2) Select 'all' for that particular channel and 'copy' it.
3) 'Paste' it into a new 'Layer.'
4) 'Flatten' the entire image. (This operation is found in the sub-menu of
'Layers/Channels/Paths', hidden by the little black arrow.)
5) Save as .jpeg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sven Littkowski <jam### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> Hi Kenneth, can you show me the image how it looks? Would be
> interesting. Thanks. :-)
>
Here's just a single cylinder. Note the straight-line 'seam' that shows up--
that's because the extreme left and right edges of your original image_map are
not the same, visually. When the edges meet around the cylinder, they produce a
visual glitch. Nothing much can be done about that, unless you modify your
original image_map so that it's less noticeable. You could try 'blurring' the
left and right edges.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'green_cylinder.jpg' (91 KB)
Preview of image 'green_cylinder.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks!
And I use PS v7... :-)
On 15.02.2016 08:10, Kenneth wrote:
> If you really want to do something like that, here's how in Photoshop (I'm
> using *old* PS v5.0) --
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Yes, I have heard about it, and maybe even had it once installed. Will
try out. Thanks!
On 15.02.2016 07:41, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> Try The Gimp
> http://www.gimp.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Yes, I will do exactly that (mirrored copied opposite edge and blurred).
Thanks.
Can you show me the scene source code? My own version really looks way
different. Thanks once more.
-----------------------------------------------
On 15.02.2016 08:54, Kenneth wrote:
> Here's just a single cylinder. Note the straight-line 'seam' that shows up--
> that's because the extreme left and right edges of your original image_map are
> not the same, visually. When the edges meet around the cylinder, they produce a
> visual glitch. Nothing much can be done about that, unless you modify your
> original image_map so that it's less noticeable. You could try 'blurring' the
> left and right edges.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Sven Littkowski <jam### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
>
> Can you show me the scene source code? My own version really looks way
> different. Thanks once more.
>
(I actually used assumed_gamma 2.0 for my tests, in v3.62, but you should use
1.0 for yours, in v3.7. The color will look somewhat different.)
-----------
#include "shapes.inc"
camera {
perspective
location <-.7, .4, -2.8>
look_at <190, -100, 1000>
right x*image_width/image_height
angle 36
}
light_source {
0*x
color rgb 1.3
translate <-120, 100, 600>
}
light_source {
0*x
color rgb 1
translate <25, 40, -200>
}
background{rgb .3}
#declare Fn_1 = function
{
pigment
{
image_map {
jpeg "colony ship i - heightfield landscape 1000px.jpg" once interpolate 2 }
}
}
#declare TheLandscape = object
{
HF_Cylinder(function { Fn_1(x,y*1.7,z).red },
1,
0,
<int(100*pi),100>,
1,
"",
<0,0,0>,
<0,1.7,0>,
0.5,
0.1
)
}
object {TheLandscape
texture{pigment {rgb 3*< 0.05, 0.25, 0.0 > }finish{ambient .3 diffuse .7}}
rotate 80*x
}
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 15.02.2016 um 16:05 schrieb Kenneth:
> (I actually used assumed_gamma 2.0 for my tests, in v3.62, but you should use
> 1.0 for yours, in v3.7. The color will look somewhat different.)
Speaking of gamma...
> #declare Fn_1 = function
> {
> pigment
> {
> image_map {
> jpeg "colony ship i - heightfield landscape 1000px.jpg" once interpolate 2 }
... you should add "gamma 1.0" after the filename (or whatever your
assumed_gamma setting is).
When used in an image_map, POV-Ray by default assumes that the image
uses gamma encoding (which most people think is linear but actually
isn't), and needs to be converted to POV-Ray's truly linear colour space
upon loading (presuming assumed_gamma is 1.0).
However, when an image is used to represent terrain height rather than
colours, the usual approach is to encode terrain height in a truly
linear fashion. If you use an image in a height_field, POV-Ray takes
this into account, and performs no gamma adjustment on the image data
whatsoever (unless you explicitly tell it otherwise).
With a HF_Cylinder, POV-Ray cannot do this automatically, because it has
no way of knowing that the colours in the image_map will ultimately be
converted into height values. Therefore, by default it /will/ perform
gamma adjustment.
Specifying "gamma 1.0" after the filename tells POV-Ray that the image
data is encoded linearly, so if "assumed_gamma" is also set to 1.0
POV-Ray's gamma adjustment for that particular image is a 1:1 mapping,
effectively leaving the data unchanged.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 16-02-15 06:40, Sven Littkowski a écrit :
> When I try in Photoshop, I cannot save anymore as JPG.
>
You need to export to JPG/JPEG, PNG,...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks. Got it. :-)
On 16.02.2016 14:33, Alain wrote:
> You need to export to JPG/JPEG, PNG,...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I just found this:
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3Cweb.4d5913dd16b39e34ec13f70a0@news.povray.org%3E/
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/thread/%3Cweb.4d54751172cba645ec13f70a0@news.povray.org%3E/
I'm not sure how everything stays lit. But it looks cool nonetheless.
Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
