 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
from p.o-t. discussion. A picture argues ...
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'packaging.jpg' (74 KB)
Preview of image 'packaging.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> from p.o-t. discussion. A picture argues ...
Wow! That's awesome...
Well, the last one is clearly a simple granite texture or similar. But
no idea how you managed the rest. :-.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Source code please? Pretty please?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Emerald Orchid wrote:
>
> Wow! That's awesome...
I'm assuming I can take that as a 'Yes, Shay, your point was proven'.
>
> Well, the last one is clearly a simple granite texture or similar.
> But no idea how you managed the rest. :-.
*Exactly* as described in p.o-t.
-Shay
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Roberto Amorim wrote:
> Source code please? Pretty please?
>
>
Sorry, can't post the source, but, seriously, all four were about 20
minutes coding plus another 10 or so of playing with parameters.
-Shay
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Shay wrote:
>
> Sorry, can't post the source, but, seriously, all four were
> about 20 minutes coding plus another 10 or so of playing with
> parameters.
I realized that to a person who hadn't read Andrew's and my discussion
in p.o-t, the above might look like I was bragging. Actually, I was just
commenting on how simple it is to make pigment functions LOOK LIKE
pigment functions. It's what pigment functions tend to do. lol
-Shay
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
