 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
You could use the heightfield macro that comes in shapes.inc. Write out the
heightfield vertices to a file, scale them to a proper amount, and transfer
the each vertex of your mesh along its normal by the given height of one of
the HF vertices.
-Shay
John Bradshaw <joh### [at] nospam hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:3c729214@news.povray.org...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"John Bradshaw" <joh### [at] nospamhotmailcom> wrote in message
news:3c729214@news.povray.org...
> Would love to model the displacement instead of just bump mapping,
> but the modeler that I am using (wings) doesn't have an option of
> introducing noise or turbulence into the mesh. Any ideas on how to
> perturb a mesh or mesh2 object using noise or turbulence?
Don't know what your modelling there, but guess it's something that can't be
expressed as a function? If it could be an isosurface could be nice..
Ari-Matti
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'SEM.jpg' (31 KB)
Preview of image 'SEM.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Very nice image.
No it can't be expressed as a function (at least not with my rudimentary
math skills). See next post: SEM neurons
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Anyway to do it that is $50 less? (yes, I know I'm cheap--actually I'm just
poor or married--they both keep me from spending $50 just like that). Even
an algorithm--I'm on spring break and might have some time to put into it.
John
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
in news:3c726ebb@news.povray.org John Bradshaw wrote:
> I got an SEM texture that I like.
>
Here's a SEM image of spheres I made ~15 years ago. It's coffee creamer.
http://members.home.nl/seedseven/creamer.png
Ingo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thanks for the reference image. You're the third person that has responded
to my threads that has had experience with SEM. Interesting. I guess I
shouldn't be surprised--pov and SEM (and some other things as well) are
"technical" aspects of visual "art". Anyone else out there?
Yes, the texture has a way to go. I was just happy to get closer for the
moment.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John Bradshaw wrote:
> Thanks for the reference image. You're the third person that has responded
> to my threads that has had experience with SEM. Interesting. I guess I
> shouldn't be surprised--pov and SEM (and some other things as well) are
> "technical" aspects of visual "art". Anyone else out there?
Partly :)
I do not have much experience with SEM (actually I might get, even as a result
of my experience with POV, so there may be a connection one way or the other).
I am working in medicine though.
Andrel
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>
> I am working in medicine though.
This is OT, but what area of medicine? I'm a med student and do some
deafness research (human genetics-ENT) as well. No SEM experience, although
I have always found SEM images fascinating.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hmmm, something to look into. Thanks for the suggestion.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John Bradshaw wrote:
>
> >
> > I am working in medicine though.
>
> This is OT, but what area of medicine? I'm a med student and do some
> deafness research (human genetics-ENT) as well. No SEM experience, although
> I have always found SEM images fascinating.
Cardiology (ECG signal processing, arrhythmia, image processing,
molecular cardiology, embryology and in fact anything with computers).
Any further comments preferably to my e-mail address, this thread is
going off topic.
Andrel
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
