"Reactor" <rea### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:4156f787$1@news.povray.org...
>
> "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote in message
news:4156f3a8@news.povray.org...

> >      Either that, or delete your arch and 'grow' a new one out of
the
> > main rock. Whichever is easiest.  ;)

>
> Ah, ok... yeah, the main arch does seem to stick out a bit too much.
It is
> funny, I originally started modelling from a picture of a natural
bridge
> along a coastline which had a very long, very thin bridge to a
rather
> largish sea stack... which looks nothing like this.

  It doesn't matter. That complete rock and arch could be from
anywhere around the world, so I'm not saying that it sticks out too
much, I'm saying that the seam or join between the arch and the main
rock is easily seen (to me) - it just wouldn't be there in real life.
Also, if you think about erosion, would the sea 'really' degrade that
rock like that? Maybe, maybe not. From what I remember, most holes in
weather/sea worn rocks are fairly small and round-ish in appearance.
Maybe drag a bunch of vertices down at the end of the arch and into
the main wall. Doing this in all directions might hide this entirely.

Oh well. I might have
> to try the re-bridging the bridge trick, I've been making insets and
moving
> them using magnet ops, sort of like a smooth extrude.  I am actually
> abandoning that model, but if i weren't I'd probably make the part
closest
> to the main "wall" much thicker vertically, and maybe move it a bit
closer.
> Also, since each formation was done at different times, the harder,
less
> eroded rock sticks out at different levels... There is a lot that
could be
> done, but it seems that wings is up to it.

  I think I said most of that above, but yes, wings will do it. Give
it a go.


    ~Steve~



>        Reactor

Post a reply to this message