"MichaelJF" <mi-### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> Yes indeed, that one of the wonderful things about raytracing, one learns every
day
> a litte bit more.
>
> >
> >    Yes, my repair_seams method was a quick hack... indeed what you
> > suggest could deliver a more accurate result, if I'm understanding
> > correctly.
>
> I tried the following with good results:
> #declare t_output_image=
> texture{t_base_image translate bake_padding*x}
> texture{t_base_image translate -bake_padding*x}
> texture{t_base_image translate bake_padding*y}
> texture{t_base_image translate -bake_padding*y}
> texture{t_base_image}
>
> #declare Pixel=1/image_width;
> #declare t_blur_image = texture {
>    average
>    texture_map {
>       [ 1 t_output_image translate <-Pixel,-Pixel,0>  ]
>       [ 2 t_output_image translate <0,-Pixel,0>  ]
>       [ 1 t_output_image translate <Pixel,-Pixel,0>  ]
>       [ 2 t_output_image translate <-Pixel,0,0>  ]
>       [ 4 t_output_image  ]
>       [ 2 t_output_image translate <Pixel,0,0>  ]
>       [ 1 t_output_image translate <-Pixel,Pixel,0>  ]
>       [ 2 t_output_image translate <0,Pixel,0>  ]
>       [ 1 t_output_image translate <Pixel,Pixel,0>  ]
>
>
>    }
> }

This simulates an 3x3 Gaussian filter. Sorry for this posting in two parts, but
I was rejected by the server now four times in a row.

Best regards,
Michael

Post a reply to this message