On 11/4/19 6:51 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> I love this isosurface technique of yours!
> 
> Here is an example of my tweaking. I had to increase threshold to about 
> 0.5 as at 0.0 nothing showed up. I replaced raw_wave by poly_wave 0.16 
> for the green and by sine_wave for the other two patterns. I also played 
> around with (scaled) warp {turbulence} instead of turbulence. And 
> finally, I used different values of accuracy for the different 
> isosurfaces. Did also a bit of work on the textures.
> 

Ah, cool! Glad you got it to work. I'm so used to working at a threshold 
of 0 for isosurfaces I didn't even think about changing it so the new 
raw_wave was not needed(1).

What I intended to be dead / dried ground cover shows up much better in 
your render too (your poly_wave use maybe? (2)).

Playing with accuracy is a good idea too. I didn't think to try that and 
I expect it a useful 'effects knob' here like gradient.

Bill P.

(1) - The new raw_wave keyword is necessary for stuff to show up at a 
threshold of 0 (to show up reliably). An implication of changing the 
threshold is the 'vertical' position of everything moves with that 
change, but it makes this a workable technique today.

(2) - Still on my list to introduce something like a 'function_mode' 
keyword which like 'raw_wave' will allow functions to generally work 
with wave modifiers. Unlike 'raw_wave,' it would continue to enable 
access to all the wave modifiers - poly_wave etc. I was calling this 
'function_wave,' but think now 'function_mode' a better name for what it 
will do. Namely, change the behavior of wave modifications so as to be 
function compatible (thinking all to a -1 to 1 range instead of 0 to 1, 
but otherwise doing the same sort of wave-shaping thing they do today(3)).

(3) - On my todo list is to someday think more about how the new to 3.8 
blend_mode, blend_gamma overlap (and not) with the existing pattern wave 
modifiers. Carrying a question since the blend_* keywords introduced(3a) 
about whether we really needed blend_gamma, but something for another day.

(3a) - ... and that blend_gamma isn't applied to the filter and transmit 
channels and perhaps it should always be - or that we should use 
poly_wave over blend_gamma when we want this behavior ...

Post a reply to this message