> 
> This is true, it takes an artist to get something really good, but admittedly,
> the software will play a part. I can take Bryce 1 and get a really nice sunset
> and it will take all of five minutes. To do it in POV-Ray takes  a lot longer
> because there is a much more challenging learning curve than in Bryce. The
> sample image you posted is impressive, yes, but my questions involve how the
> thing was made. Are those bricks an image map?

Certainly, like almost all the textures in the scene I think.
Professional use
only procedurial (shader) texture for glass, water (actually almost all
transparent texture), sometime sky (this is the case in Riven), for
some metal texture, fire (not always), glowing effect, etc.... But for 
wood, rock, brick etc... this is almost always image map. 
But personally I don't see the problem. If you want to make "photo 
realistic" (this is not the goal of everyone) picture, it doesn't matter 
the technic you use to get the result : all technic is ok if the result
is good. 
And this is more easy with image map, but you need to be able to work on 
this image, this is sometime a lot of work:

1) make the photo
2) scan the photo (if this is not a digital one)
3) make it seamless (you need to know the technics)
4) correct the quality in photoshop (not always "easy"), etc...

Fabian.

Post a reply to this message