Slime wrote:
> See the thread in povray.general ("Can I bake UV textures with Povray?") for
> discussion.
> 
> There are very slight differences between the two images which aren't very
> noticeable. One difference (and the most significant one) is that along the
> corners, the UV mapped version has some slight artifacts because it's
> sampling from the background area of the UV texture. This would be more
> noticable if I had used a lower resolution UV map (the version shown is half
> the size of the original 512x512). The other difference is that there is a
> very tiny discrepancy in some triangles between where colors in the
> procedural texture appear and where colors in the UV texture appear;
> probably due to innacuracies in the sampling.
> 
> This would be better implemented as a patch, especially because of how
> incredibly slow it is (there may be room for some optimization). But in a
> pinch it can do the trick.
> 
>  - Slime
>  [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
> 
> 
> 
Well I for one am damned impressed!  You said the UV projection had to 
be established first.  How did you do that?  The reason I ask is that I 
think the polys would have to have be contiguous in some way if the next 
stage in the workflow was to take the template and add more stuff, say 
hand-drawn wrinkles, for instance.  That, anyway, is how I imagine this 
technique would play a role in a workflow.  I assume by your description 
that that could be done.  How you get the original UV's is arbitrary right?

Post a reply to this message