|
 |
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degroot org> wrote:
> On 16-5-2016 12:26, Kenneth wrote:
> >
> > (I discovered this quirk by chance; your code had a small typo in the image_map
> > entry, that didn't quite match your .png image's actual name. But it rendered
> > successfully anyway!)
>
> Oh? I don't see any difference between the two names on my side.
>
Hmm, that's strange. On my end (using Firefox as a browser), here's what I
see...
(your code snippet)
image_map {
png"Mapping_test.png" gamma 1.0 interpolate 2
}
Attachments:
download "mapping_test.png" (48 KB)
.... and the .png file is saved on my system as "mapping_test"
About the depth map: I assume that you created it in POV-Ray (using a
white-to-black color_map laid over the model in +z?) Perhaps you could run TWO
renders, one for just the face, and one for the areas behind the face (ears,
neck, etc.), using some kind of (precise!) trick with *different* color_maps,
plus appropriate inner/outer transparency for each render (to separate the
areas.) Then combine them in GIMP.
OR, you could separate your original depth-map image into two parts with a
precise mask, and boost the contrast of just the face.
I can't say for sure if either method would actually produce a 'correct'
isosurface face shape, but it might be worth a try. It's kind of like trying to
make a face using a height_field and a depth-map; I've tried doing that, with
not-very-good results. The image_map artwork has to be made *just so*, and bears
little resemblance to an actual face!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
