On 01/12/2011 12:22 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 01.12.2011 11:02, schrieb Invisible:
>
>> I still don't see how you can "fix" the seems. It's not like you can
>> move individual blades of grass around.
>
> For /really/ good seamless textures, that's exactly what you do.

Except that, uh, it can't be done? :-P

> You haven't spent much time with Photoshop or Gimp, have you?

Photoshop is /far/ too expensive for me to ever afford. (Especially 
given that I'd probably hardly ever use it anyway.)

I've used the Gimp. Everybody claims it's this insanely powerful 
product. Personally, I can't get it to do anything vaguely useful... If 
there /are/ powerful features in there, they are very well hidden.

>> POV-Ray makes nice stone textures (unless you're a geologist) and wood
>> textures (unless you're a dendrologist). Last time I checked, there's no
>> way of making a canvas texture or a wet paper texture or a spilled paint
>> texture or...
>
> Make that "last time I checked, no-one had yet found a way of...",
> because unless you've checked every possible combination of parameters,
> layered textures, averaged textures, and what-have-you, there are still
> ways undiscovered that might lead to the desired result.

Most interesting textures do not have closed-form representations. 
POV-Ray only renders closed-form equations. QED.

Post a reply to this message