On 1/26/22 08:39, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> On 2022-01-26 09:19 (-4), Cousin Ricky wrote:
>> On 2022-01-25 08:55 (-4), William F Pokorny wrote:
>>>
>>> Agree, though, I still don't get what all is happening there to get the
>>> milky effect. On the overdone sphere - remember I'm testing limits not
>>> going for any given look. Even the milky effect I found by using bump
>>> sizes larger than what I think most would / should typically use in
>>> practice.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>
>> I've used bump_size as high as 2, with f_ridged_mf used as a normal,
>> though not in an attempt at micronormal effects.  I did not see any sign
>> of normal inversion.
> 
> I just looked back at my images, and though f_ridged_mf() showed no
> signs of inversion, f_ridge() most certainly did.  However, I have not
> checked to see whether the inversion was due to bump_size.
> 
> waves-ridge2.jpg uses f_ridged_mf() bump_size 2.
> waves-ridge3.jpg uses f_ridged() bump_size 2.

Ah, you're quicker than me - yeah, what happens in the end depends on a 
lot of variables. :-)

Bill P.

Post a reply to this message