"Remy Closset" <rem### [at] neuffr> schreef in bericht 
news:452fc697$1@news.povray.org...
> Thomas
>
> Beautiful procedural textures, as always in your work. Strange atmosphere. 
> Only is missing an archeologist wotking with a toothbrush.
>

Thank you Remy!
Yes, the archeologist could be added indeed (after the IRTC). I shall think 
about it.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

I am presently at a loss to solve this puzzle:

- I have the seaweed on the sand coded as a layered texture (sand texture + 
weed texture);
- I have the shells traced randomly in a while loop, with their own texture;
- I have those columns also traced randomly, with a layered texture (stone + 
weed);

- How can I make the seaweed also cover any object on the sand (shells or 
others)? I cannot do this by putting a weed texture on top of a union of the 
HF and the random objects.

So, what would be a practical solution? Do the same as for the columns?
The problem is that I have to carefully rescale the weed texture each time. 
I did not really do that for the stones on the sand for instance, and you 
see the difference.

Any smart idea?

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlnet> wrote:
> - How can I make the seaweed also cover any object on the sand (shells or
> others)? I cannot do this by putting a weed texture on top of a union of the
> HF and the random objects.
Pre-declare a weed texture. Apply it to objects after all transformations...
then objects in the same place should end up textured the same. If you need
different scale factors, use different weed textures.

I have no idea if that will help!

I sympathise; I had some real headaches getting the moss texture onto the
bricks in my knotworld...

Bill

Post a reply to this message

Thomas de Groot nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 14/10/2006 03:18:
> "Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht 
> news:web.452fad00196f9067731f01d10@news.povray.org...
>> Excellent concept, and I love the image!

> Thank you indeed, Bill!

>> A few thoughts:
>> The muddy-seaweed texture on the columns and river bed looks OK from a
>> distance, but decidedly procedural from close up! I think a little more
>> work on this would improve it no end.
>> Not sure about the actual presence of the columns. If you remove the one 
>> in
>> the foreground, it may not be obvious what the others are... and the 
>> others
>> block the view along the river somewhat...
>> Maybe a jetty or pontoon on the left, with some stray vertical timbers to
>> indicate age? They could get the seaweed treatment instead? Just an idea.

> Yes, the seaweed is a problem I was aware of for the foreground, especially 
> as the camera is very close to the ground. It certainly needs more work. 
> Best should be to detach it completely from the texture and apply it 
> separately...
> The columns seem to interfere with the theme, I understand. I shall try to 
> replace them and see what that will result in. he jetty idea was there but I 
> didn't complete it. The problem might be the size of the scene. The jetty 
> may become to small in relation to the rest. Hmmm. Have to experiment.
> Note that this is more a fjord-sized estuary than a river, and thus also 
> much deeper than a conventional river would be. The outlet is invisible 
> here, but situated to the right, behind the lighthouse.

>> The wreck and the stranded non-wreck look great, and I think the 
>> river-banks
>> look fine.

> The wreck I built in Silo 1.4; the stranded ship is a detailed third-party 
> mesh.

>> PS I'm quite looking forward to seeing the other entries for this round.
>> This topic should produce some real variety!

> Yes, me too!

> Thomas 


You can reduce the number of columns, just keeping a very few. Now, there will 
be 2 things missing: the water and some very old, once submerged, building. Keep 
the slanted ones.

-- 
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
If you have one lawyer in town, he goes hungry.
If you have two lawyers in town, they both get rich.

Post a reply to this message

"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht 
news:web.4530f31d52e313ca73aa1b360@news.povray.org...
> Pre-declare a weed texture. Apply it to objects after all 
> transformations...
> then objects in the same place should end up textured the same. If you 
> need
> different scale factors, use different weed textures.
>
Hmm... essentially, that is what I did already. The main problem is that the 
different object categories (stones, shells, column segments, wood fragment) 
have their own basic texture already. I have been playing with the idea - 
like you suggest - to add a final weed texture after everything is done, but 
that doesn't work (or I did it wrong). Only the basic textures appear, not 
the overlying weed texture.

> I sympathise; I had some real headaches getting the moss texture onto the
> bricks in my knotworld...
>
I can very well imagine!! Thanks indeed for the idea.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Alain" <ele### [at] netscapenet> schreef in bericht 
news:4530f622@news.povray.org...
>
> You can reduce the number of columns, just keeping a very few. Now, there 
> will be 2 things missing: the water and some very old, once submerged, 
> building. Keep the slanted ones.
>
Yes, that is a nice solution indeed. Thanks!!

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

OK. Did some experimenting with layered textures. This does not work. A 
pity, as I find it more *elegant* :
//------------------------------------
#declare Group =
union {
  box {
    <-1, -1, -1>, <1, 1, 1>
    translate  <-0.3, 0.0, -0.5>
    texture {Layer1 scale 0.1}
  }
  sphere {
    <0,0,0>,1
    translate  <0.8, -0.6, 0.3>
    texture {Layer2 scale 0.1}
  }
  texture {YellowTransparantColor}
}
object {Group}
//------------------------------------

But this does what I want (see the image):
//------------------------------------
#declare Group =
union {
  box {
    <-1, -1, -1>, <1, 1, 1>
    translate  <-0.3, 0.0, -0.5>
    texture {Layer1 scale 0.1}
    texture {YellowTransparantColor}
  }
  sphere {
    <0,0,0>,1
    translate  <0.8, -0.6, 0.3>
    texture {Layer2 scale 0.1}
    texture {YellowTransparantColor}
  }
}
object {Group}
//------------------------------------

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'layeredTexture_test.png' (103 KB)

Preview of image 'layeredTexture_test.png'

Wasn't it Thomas de Groot who wrote:
>OK. Did some experimenting with layered textures. This does not work. A 
>pity, as I find it more *elegant* :
>//------------------------------------
>#declare Group =
>union {
>  box {
>    <-1, -1, -1>, <1, 1, 1>
>    translate  <-0.3, 0.0, -0.5>
>    texture {Layer1 scale 0.1}
>  }
>  sphere {
>    <0,0,0>,1
>    translate  <0.8, -0.6, 0.3>
>    texture {Layer2 scale 0.1}
>  }
>  texture {YellowTransparantColor}
>}

The problem is that that syntax is already in use to mean something
different.

What it means is, apply YellowTransparantColor to any components in the
group that don't already have their own texture{}. In this case, all the
components do have their own texture, so nothing happens. 

You wouldn't want to change that old syntax, because it would break
large numbers of existing scenes. You wouldn't want the syntax to have
the old meaning if there are any untextured components and have the new
meaning if there are none, because that would get very confusing
particularly if you intended to texture all the components but missed a
tiny part of a very complex CSG.

-- 
The Blackpool Community Church Javascript Team
http://www.econym.demon.co.uk/googlemaps/

Post a reply to this message

Mike Williams <nos### [at] econymdemoncouk> wrote:

[Snip]
> --
> The Blackpool Community Church Javascript Team
The mind boggles Mike :-)

Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"Mike Williams" <nos### [at] econymdemoncouk> schreef in bericht 
news:YiwFXRANd1MFFw+j### [at] econymdemoncouk...
>
> The problem is that that syntax is already in use to mean something
> different.
>
> What it means is, apply YellowTransparantColor to any components in the
> group that don't already have their own texture{}. In this case, all the
> components do have their own texture, so nothing happens.
>
> You wouldn't want to change that old syntax, because it would break
> large numbers of existing scenes. You wouldn't want the syntax to have
> the old meaning if there are any untextured components and have the new
> meaning if there are none, because that would get very confusing
> particularly if you intended to texture all the components but missed a
> tiny part of a very complex CSG.
>
> -- 
Thank you Mike, for your explanation. I was sure there was a catch :-)
What I meant by *elegant*  was in the same line as when you talk about 
clothes: they may be *elegant* but not necessarily confortable to wear! So, 
only for the eyes fixed on the catwalk.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message