Marc-Hendrik Bremer wrote:

> What do you think?

Superb,  except that I get the sense that a bump or distortion on one brick
continues in its next door neighboor, which is unrealistic.

Post a reply to this message

Marc-Hendrik Bremer wrote:
> 
> Yes, that's what I wanted to try and tried to avoid - by adding a granite
> pigment, I reduced the gradient to something like 22.
> 

That's the maximum gradient detected, but that does not mean much.  If you
decrease the accuracy value or increase the step between brick and mortar,
it will increase again.  

> [...]
> >
> 
> He takes a bozo-pattern and repeats and "offset"s to fit on the bricks. But
> I just saw, that Ken allready posted the link to the tutorial ...
> 

Thanks, also to Ken.

Christoph

-- 
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other 
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

Greg M. Johnson schrieb in Nachricht <3A83113B.1DCCE9D2@my-dejanews.com>...
>Marc-Hendrik Bremer wrote:
>
>> What do you think?
>
>Superb,  except that I get the sense that a bump or distortion on one brick
>continues in its next door neighboor, which is unrealistic.
>

Thank you! Yes, the granite pigment I applied to the bricks was the same
over the whole wall. I think I solved that problem by treating the
granite-pigment-function like the colours of the bricks - I chopped it apart
by repeat warps. It's better now, but it takes even longer to render (some
80% for the non-antialiased version) .

Marc-Hendrik

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 08 Feb 2001 21:08:32 +0100, Christoph Hormann
<chr### [at] gmxde> wrote:

>It looks nice, but the brick pattern, like other color list patterns, is
>not well suited for isosurfaces because of the infinite gradient problem. 

One can use the boxed pattern with three repeat warps to make
isosurface friendly bricks.


Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] vipbg
TAG      e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg

Post a reply to this message

Very impressive.The texture looks just fine to me. Only questions would be :
1) It looks like a depth of four bricks (on the top) - if so, they wouldn't
be laid in line like that and each brick should be deeper (in proportion to
the length).
2) The tops look too bumpy compared to real bricks, perhaps they just need
an indentation like you get in some bricks.
3) How about a proper bricklaying pattern e.g. Flemish Bond.
4) Mortar looks a bit grey and shiny to me (like chewing gum).

Post a reply to this message

Richard Morton schrieb in Nachricht <3a87b021$1@news.povray.org>...
>Very impressive.The texture looks just fine to me.

Thanks. I tend to think that bricks have no solid colour over the whole
side. OTOH it seems to greatly depend on the age of the bricks. Older ones
get more colourfull? Perhaps it's just that they had not that pure material
some decades ago.

>Only questions would be :
>1) It looks like a depth of four bricks (on the top) - if so, they wouldn't
>be laid in line like that and each brick should be deeper (in proportion to
>the length).

Yes, 4 rows. I agree, that they shold not be in lines. But since I'm still
using the brick pattern, that's what it gives me. I tried to warp the
pattern half a brick, but that did not work as expected, so I didn't follow
that path any further. Probably I had just to translate the pattern first
... perhaps I'll try again.
You think the proportions are not right? It's the default size 8 to 3  to
4.5 units (with mortar 0.5 units). I noticed, that there are differend sizes
out there (at least in older buildings. Which is the most commonly used
ratio?

>2) The tops look too bumpy compared to real bricks, perhaps they just need
>an indentation like you get in some bricks.

What would that indentation look like? I allready reduced the influence of
the granite-pattern a lot. The posted image was made with an orthographic
camera and a shadowless light source. This way it is hard to see, that the
bricks are that bumpy at all sides.

>3) How about a proper bricklaying pattern e.g. Flemish Bond.

I must admit, I don't know any. But since it could be worth to build another
brick-pattern for isosurfaces, it may be possible to realise differend
patterns. I don't like the idea to position some hundreds of
isosurface-bricks in a box of iso-mortar ( I just can't get these things
right), so I would need a proper pattern to do so.

>4) Mortar looks a bit grey and shiny to me (like chewing gum).


I changed it already, if it's better now, I don't know. At least it's
different now :-)

Thanks for the suggestions,

Marc-Hendrik

Post a reply to this message

It looks good, especially the mortar but 22 minutes for such a small piece
doesn't seem very practical. 
Is it possible to use this in larger objects?

Remco

Marc-Hendrik Bremer wrote:
> 
> Jpg-compression was not very friendly to the roughness of the mortar, but I
> think, this one is big enough for a technical-study.
> I wonder if it's worth to follow this path further (and which way to go),
> cause this simple scene with aa 0.3 needed 22 m 19 s on my PII 450 MHz (with
> some other stuff running as well). It's one isosurface, using the
> brick-pattern as a function and Jeff Lee's technique to give the bricks
> individual colours. The textures still needs a lot of work.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Marc-Hendrik
> 
>   --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                     Name: Bricktest.jpg
>    Bricktest.jpg    Type: JPEG Image (image/jpeg)
>                 Encoding: base64

Post a reply to this message

Brick needs to project farther out of the mortar.  The brick looks like it
is flush with the mortar.

Jim

"Marc-Hendrik Bremer" <Mar### [at] t-onlinede> wrote in message
news:3a82f9e4@news.povray.org...
> Jpg-compression was not very friendly to the roughness of the mortar, but
I
> think, this one is big enough for a technical-study.
> I wonder if it's worth to follow this path further (and which way to go),
> cause this simple scene with aa 0.3 needed 22 m 19 s on my PII 450 MHz
(with
> some other stuff running as well). It's one isosurface, using the
> brick-pattern as a function and Jeff Lee's technique to give the bricks
> individual colours. The textures still needs a lot of work.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Marc-Hendrik
>

Post a reply to this message

Jim Kress schrieb in Nachricht <3a8980d6$1@news.povray.org>...
>Brick needs to project farther out of the mortar.  The brick looks like it
>is flush with the mortar.
>


That's just the orthographic camera in conjunction with a shadowless light
(the later adds more to the effect). In deed I had to reduce the distance
when I switched the shadows on.

Marc-Hendrik

Post a reply to this message

Remco de Korte schrieb in Nachricht <3A8953DC.24DD89FC@xs4all.nl>...
>It looks good, especially the mortar but 22 minutes for such a small piece
>doesn't seem very practical.
>Is it possible to use this in larger objects?
>


Thanks! Rendertime got even worth when changed some things (like some more
warps to distort the granite-bumps a bit oh, and when I switched the shadows
on, that took also it's time). I had once an hour for this piece of masonry
(without anti-aliasing that is). But I speeded things up a bit afterwards
and think the rendertime is quite okay. Although it's just one small piece
it covers most of the 640x480 pixels.
I'm using it now as part of another object and rendertimes are not that bad,
as it covers only part of the image (some 14 min for the whole scene).
Things slow down when it comes to the bricks, but I'm already used to it -
the sign in my last scene rendered for a full night.

Marc-Hendrik

Post a reply to this message