On 7/31/2017 2:55 AM, Stephen wrote:
> On 7/31/2017 7:46 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 31-7-2017 2:54, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>> On 7/22/2017 9:42 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>>> can't decide if marble / subsurface is next ... or glass!
>>>
>>> here's a marble version ... there were some problems with the model
>>> that were hidden by the procedural normal i used on the granite
>>> version. much trial and error then smoothing the vertex weights around
>>> the cut outs fixed it ... didn't even have to subdivide or use shade
>>> smooth. blender did do a pretty decent job on the uv mapping as well.
>>> i /do/ see a couple of /hot/ pixels i think a tad too much
>>> translucency. a little bit more work and i think this one's ready for
>>> a beauty run!
>>>
>>
>> The translucency looks ok to me. The marble is gorgeous.
>>
> 
> I thought it was the translucency that was showing up on the shadow.

that's reflection of brick wall and part of window in hdr probe ... but 
closer to object the floor is showing the translucency i was talking about

Post a reply to this message

On 7/31/2017 2:46 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 31-7-2017 2:54, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>> On 7/22/2017 9:42 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>> can't decide if marble / subsurface is next ... or glass!
>>
>> here's a marble version ... there were some problems with the model 
>> that were hidden by the procedural normal i used on the granite 
>> version. much trial and error then smoothing the vertex weights around 
>> the cut outs fixed it ... didn't even have to subdivide or use shade 
>> smooth. blender did do a pretty decent job on the uv mapping as well. 
>> i /do/ see a couple of /hot/ pixels i think a tad too much 
>> translucency. a little bit more work and i think this one's ready for 
>> a beauty run!
>>
> 
> The translucency looks ok to me. The marble is gorgeous.

well i'll only take partial credit for that ... it's an image map. 
getting the uv mapping correct was the challenge

Post a reply to this message

On 31-7-2017 12:34, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 7/31/2017 2:46 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 31-7-2017 2:54, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>> On 7/22/2017 9:42 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>>> can't decide if marble / subsurface is next ... or glass!
>>>
>>> here's a marble version ... there were some problems with the model 
>>> that were hidden by the procedural normal i used on the granite 
>>> version. much trial and error then smoothing the vertex weights 
>>> around the cut outs fixed it ... didn't even have to subdivide or use 
>>> shade smooth. blender did do a pretty decent job on the uv mapping as 
>>> well. i /do/ see a couple of /hot/ pixels i think a tad too much 
>>> translucency. a little bit more work and i think this one's ready for 
>>> a beauty run!
>>>
>>
>> The translucency looks ok to me. The marble is gorgeous.
> 
> well i'll only take partial credit for that ... it's an image map. 
> getting the uv mapping correct was the challenge
> 

Oh! Yes, I can imagine the puzzle for this kind of object! ;-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 7/30/2017 8:54 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 7/22/2017 9:42 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>> can't decide if marble / subsurface is next ... or glass!
well i'm struggling with the marble / subsurface so i decided to do a 
metal version while i consider my next move ...

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'rollysphere.png' (985 KB)

Preview of image 'rollysphere.png'

On 20-8-2017 13:38, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 7/30/2017 8:54 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>> On 7/22/2017 9:42 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>> can't decide if marble / subsurface is next ... or glass!
> well i'm struggling with the marble / subsurface so i decided to do a 
> metal version while i consider my next move ...
> 
> 
> 

Very nice one but... I miss the imperfections: (small) scratches, 
blemishes, stains, etc.  Too perfect as is. ;-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:

>
> Very nice one but... I miss the imperfections: (small) scratches,
> blemishes, stains, etc.  Too perfect as is. ;-)
>
Yes, I agree. Maybe it needs slightly 'blurred reflections.' That seems to be a
tell-tale sign of 'metal' (except for polished chrome?)

Post a reply to this message

On 8/21/2017 3:00 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 20-8-2017 13:38, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>> On 7/30/2017 8:54 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>> On 7/22/2017 9:42 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>>> can't decide if marble / subsurface is next ... or glass!
>> well i'm struggling with the marble / subsurface so i decided to do a 
>> metal version while i consider my next move ...
>>
>>
>>
> 
> Very nice one but... I miss the imperfections: (small) scratches, 
> blemishes, stains, etc.  Too perfect as is. ;-)
> 
lol ... know what you mean. guess you missed the brasso and old t-shirt 
i used to shine it up before i posted

Post a reply to this message

On 8/21/2017 4:01 AM, Kenneth wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> 
>>
>> Very nice one but... I miss the imperfections: (small) scratches,
>> blemishes, stains, etc.  Too perfect as is. ;-)
>>
> Yes, I agree. Maybe it needs slightly 'blurred reflections.' That seems to be a
> tell-tale sign of 'metal' (except for polished chrome?)

i'm pretty sure that'll happen in version 2.0 ... i'm already working on 
it. i /had/ a doh moment with the procedural normal i'm using when i 
realized that with the current uv map i /should/ have used warp { planar }

Post a reply to this message

On 21-8-2017 12:46, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 8/21/2017 3:00 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 20-8-2017 13:38, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>> On 7/30/2017 8:54 PM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>>> On 7/22/2017 9:42 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
>>>>> can't decide if marble / subsurface is next ... or glass!
>>> well i'm struggling with the marble / subsurface so i decided to do a 
>>> metal version while i consider my next move ...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Very nice one but... I miss the imperfections: (small) scratches, 
>> blemishes, stains, etc.  Too perfect as is. ;-)
>>
> lol ... know what you mean. guess you missed the brasso and old t-shirt 
> i used to shine it up before i posted

Aaah! You kept /those/ out of the camera shot! :-)

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 21/08/2017 11:46, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 8/21/2017 3:00 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 20-8-2017 13:38, Jim Holsenback wrote:

>>>
>>
>> Very nice one but... I miss the imperfections: (small) scratches, 
>> blemishes, stains, etc.  Too perfect as is. ;-)
>>
> lol ... know what you mean. guess you missed the brasso and old t-shirt 
> i used to shine it up before i posted

That takes me back a few years. :)


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message