 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hey there!
I saw an image posted a while back with 2 hands reaching up out of the sand.
I took some inspiration from that. Here, a hand is reaching up out of the
ground towards the rising sun. What do you think? Questions? Comments?
-Dayv
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'reach.jpg' (23 KB)
Preview of image 'reach.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Dayv wrote:
>
> Hey there!
> I saw an image posted a while back with 2 hands reaching up out of the sand.
> I took some inspiration from that. Here, a hand is reaching up out of the
> ground towards the rising sun. What do you think? Questions? Comments?
For some reason it makes me think of the dead coming to life and
crawling out of the ground.. except that hand looks pretty healthy, and
I'd expect that to happen at night.
-Xplo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
For some reason, this image reminded me of a Salvador Dali painting
Leitha
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> For some reason it makes me think of the dead coming to life and
> crawling out of the ground.. except that hand looks pretty healthy, and
It looks too healthy to me. Wanted it to look more stony. Can you not
apply a normal pattern to a mesh? I've tried all kinds of granite and
crackle... and even dents and ripples just for the hell of it... of all
different scales and nothing changes its appearance at all.
Any thoughts??
Thanks
Dayv
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> It looks too healthy to me. Wanted it to look more stony. Can you not
> apply a normal pattern to a mesh? I've tried all kinds of granite and
> crackle... and even dents and ripples just for the hell of it... of all
> different scales and nothing changes its appearance at all.
>
> Any thoughts??
>
This happens if it is a mesh2 object with indexed textures. Further texture
declarations get ignored. You can use the older mesh format or edit the textures
referenced in the object's include file.
BTW, I like this image. :)
--
light_source{0,1}#macro c(J,a)sphere{0,1pigment{rgb z}scale a translate J+O}
#end#macro B(R,V,O)c(0,4)intersection{c(V,R)difference{c(-z*4x+10)c(-z*4.1x+
10)c(0<7.5,45,5>)}}#end B(12,0z*25)B(8y*4<0,12,50>) // Batronyx ^"^
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>
> This happens if it is a mesh2 object with indexed textures. Further
texture
> declarations get ignored. You can use the older mesh format or edit the
textures
> referenced in the object's include file.
It's not a mesh 2. Just a regular mesh. I figured out what the problem
was. The .inc file generated by PoseRay included uv_mapping that I thought
I had commented out. I didn't want to use the texure supplied by Poser
anyway. The texturing was done in an "object" statement in the .pov file.
I renedered the scene in both 3.5 and megapov 0.7 and got the same results.
It wasn't until I tried rendering with 3.1 that I found I had missed a bunch
of uv_mapping tags. When I removed those everything worked fine! I guess
normals and uv_mapping don't get along well? I've never used uv_mapping at
all so I have no idea.
> BTW, I like this image. :)
Thanks. Now that I've got the normal to work, I'm going to fine tune it
'till I like the way it looks!
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'reach2.jpg' (23 KB)
Preview of image 'reach2.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> It's not a mesh 2. Just a regular mesh. I figured out what the problem
> was. The .inc file generated by PoseRay included uv_mapping that I thought
> I had commented out. I didn't want to use the texure supplied by Poser
> anyway. The texturing was done in an "object" statement in the .pov file.
> I renedered the scene in both 3.5 and megapov 0.7 and got the same results.
> It wasn't until I tried rendering with 3.1 that I found I had missed a bunch
> of uv_mapping tags. When I removed those everything worked fine!
I forgot about the new uv_mapping abilities of the regular mesh. I guess it
happens there too.
> I guess
> normals and uv_mapping don't get along well? I've never used uv_mapping at
> all so I have no idea.
>
I'm no expert myself, but I would expect that the image the uv coords map into
is declared as a texture statement somewhere. I would also therefore expect one
could add a normal statement there to get bumps. I would also expect that for
good results, it should probably be based on another image(grayscale) but
anything there should produce something bumpy.
I'll have to give it try later. I'm going to need to know all of this soon
anyway.
> Thanks. Now that I've got the normal to work, I'm going to fine tune it
> 'till I like the way it looks!
>
Keep pluggin! :)
--
light_source{0,1}#macro c(J,a)sphere{0,1pigment{rgb z}scale a translate J+O}
#end#macro B(R,V,O)c(0,4)intersection{c(V,R)difference{c(-z*4x+10)c(-z*4.1x+
10)c(0<7.5,45,5>)}}#end B(12,0z*25)B(8y*4<0,12,50>) // Batronyx ^"^
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hmm...
maybe I'll try editing the tiff file (and converting it to another format so
POV-Ray can read it.) to a stony texture and try it that way.
Back to the pov'ing board. . .
Sigh. I may never have a social life again. . .
:)
-Dayv
"Batronyx" <bat### [at] alliancecable net> wrote in message
news:3c40d7d4$1@news.povray.org...
> > It's not a mesh 2. Just a regular mesh. I figured out what the problem
> > was. The .inc file generated by PoseRay included uv_mapping that I
thought
> > I had commented out. I didn't want to use the texure supplied by Poser
> > anyway. The texturing was done in an "object" statement in the .pov
file.
> > I renedered the scene in both 3.5 and megapov 0.7 and got the same
results.
> > It wasn't until I tried rendering with 3.1 that I found I had missed a
bunch
> > of uv_mapping tags. When I removed those everything worked fine!
>
> I forgot about the new uv_mapping abilities of the regular mesh. I guess
it
> happens there too.
>
> > I guess
> > normals and uv_mapping don't get along well? I've never used uv_mapping
at
> > all so I have no idea.
> >
>
> I'm no expert myself, but I would expect that the image the uv coords map
into
> is declared as a texture statement somewhere. I would also therefore
expect one
> could add a normal statement there to get bumps. I would also expect that
for
> good results, it should probably be based on another image(grayscale) but
> anything there should produce something bumpy.
>
> I'll have to give it try later. I'm going to need to know all of this soon
> anyway.
>
> > Thanks. Now that I've got the normal to work, I'm going to fine tune it
> > 'till I like the way it looks!
> >
> Keep pluggin! :)
>
>
> --
> light_source{0,1}#macro c(J,a)sphere{0,1pigment{rgb z}scale a translate
J+O}
> #end#macro
B(R,V,O)c(0,4)intersection{c(V,R)difference{c(-z*4x+10)c(-z*4.1x+
> 10)c(0<7.5,45,5>)}}#end B(12,0z*25)B(8y*4<0,12,50>) // Batronyx
^"^
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
