"omniverse" <omn### [at] charternet> wrote:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> > On 23-7-2017 8:21, omniverse wrote:
> > > clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
> > >> Am 22.07.2017 um 20:21 schrieb omniverse:
> > >>
> > >>> And something curious going on, I'm not sure about, when I add blend_mode to
my
> > >>> example; I can't get the same appearance as yours, which seems to remove the
> > >>> purple color between blue and red.
>
> Just not getting through to me why 0 to 0.5 to 1 (or just 3 entries in
> color_map) doesn't seem to be similar at all. Again, that was using the #for
> loop I was doing before too.

Almost forgot. Below is what I tried when checking the "blend", although lacks
"steps" from other way. Thanks to you others with the various ideas.

BTW, good luck jr!
Bob

#declare BeginColorCount=0; /* or zero and < EndColorCount */

#declare EndColorCount=255; /* or > BeginColorCount (must be 255 if doing below
parenthesis example) */

#declare StepsCount=1; /* number to increment by (255 makes only indicies 0 and
1) */

box { // apply to this shape
0.00001, 0.99999 // avoid color map coincident surfaces
pigment {
 gradient x // choose a directional axis
 //ramp_wave // default
 color_map {
//blend_mode 2
//blend_gamma 2.5
  #for (It,BeginColorCount,EndColorCount,StepsCount)
  [
  It/EndColorCount
  color rgb <It/EndColorCount,0,(EndColorCount-It)/EndColorCount>
  ]
  #end
 }
}
}

Post a reply to this message