On 24-4-2015 13:29, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Stating the obvious, with spline:
>

"Elementary, my dear Watson."

The problem did not reside with the spline but with the fact that the 
guide spline cut through the landscape surface. Thus, the Blockwall 
macro became nuts trying to use the trace() function.

Solved.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 25-4-2015 9:13, Stephen wrote:
> On 25/04/2015 07:55, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 24-4-2015 17:03, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 24/04/2015 15:27, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> On 24-4-2015 14:22, Stephen wrote:
>>>>> On 24/04/2015 12:15, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>>> To give an idea of the direction I want to go.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Go West, young man. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Aye, me laird :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Don't let the sheep loose on your way out. ;_)
>>
>> What sheep? I see no sheep, except the Minister's. :-)
>>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highland_Clearances#Year_of_the_Sheep

Thanks indeed! I love that kind of historical information. Somehow, it 
finds back its way into a scene or another. The painting of Rosa Bonheur 
is typical. 19th century ray-tracing! ;-) It would be interesting to 
work on that.

The captions says "about 1860", the signature clearly states "1850".

>
>
>>>
>>> You are becoming quite proficient with that slope pattern. If you don't
>>> mind me saying. :-)
>>>
>> Hm. It is a huge effort of trial and error each time
>
> Art not science then?

Certainly not ;-)

>
>> but using primary
>> colours first to get your bearings in each scene is a trick I can
>> recommend.
>>
>
> Yes, of course. I use Cyan with an ambient of 1 for the default texture.
> So that anything that I have missed texturing shows up.
>
Yes, and with trace(), using a pigment_map with different contrasting 
colours will show where the final hues will appear. They can then easily 
be manipulated into the right combination.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 25-4-2015 9:13, Stephen wrote:
> On 25/04/2015 07:55, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 24-4-2015 17:03, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 24/04/2015 15:27, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>> On 24-4-2015 14:22, Stephen wrote:
>>>>> On 24/04/2015 12:15, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>>>>>> To give an idea of the direction I want to go.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Go West, young man. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Aye, me laird :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Don't let the sheep loose on your way out. ;_)
>>
>> What sheep? I see no sheep, except the Minister's. :-)
>>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highland_Clearances#Year_of_the_Sheep

Thanks indeed! I love that kind of historical information. Somehow, it 
finds back its way into a scene or another. The painting of Rosa Bonheur 
is typical. 19th century ray-tracing! ;-) It would be interesting to 
work on that.

The captions says "about 1860", the signature clearly states "1850".

>
>
>>>
>>> You are becoming quite proficient with that slope pattern. If you don't
>>> mind me saying. :-)
>>>
>> Hm. It is a huge effort of trial and error each time
>
> Art not science then?

Certainly not ;-)

>
>> but using primary
>> colours first to get your bearings in each scene is a trick I can
>> recommend.
>>
>
> Yes, of course. I use Cyan with an ambient of 1 for the default texture.
> So that anything that I have missed texturing shows up.
>
Yes, and with trace(), using a pigment_map with different contrasting 
colours will show where the final hues will appear. They can then easily 
be manipulated into the right combination.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 25/04/2015 08:33, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> On 25-4-2015 9:13, Stephen wrote:

>
> Thanks indeed! I love that kind of historical information. Somehow, it
> finds back its way into a scene or another.The painting of Rosa Bonheur
> is typical. 19th century ray-tracing! ;-) It would be interesting to
> work on that.
>

Did you forget to say things backward? ;-)
I am not too sure if you mean Rosa Bonheur's paintings or the painting 
of her by Édouard Dubufe?

19th century ray-tracing! - Camera obscura?


>>
>> Art not science then?
>
> Certainly not ;-)
>

More like black magic to me. :-)


>>
> Yes, and with trace(), using a pigment_map with different contrasting
> colours will show where the final hues will appear. They can then easily
> be manipulated into the right combination.
>

I might dispute the "easily" bit. :-)

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 24/04/15 12:15, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> To give an idea of the direction I want to go.
> 
> Somehow, the wall* in the forefront is cut short despite the spline
> going further. No idea why. I thought it could be an epsilon artefact...
> 
> 
> * Chris B's Blockwall used here.

Posting a bit late, so you've sorted the wall problem.

The castle is perfect; however, I'm a little bit concerned about the
straightness of the field walls - a drunken McAvoy would never have
produced such.

<offers a large quaich of Glenmorangie to Stephen/>

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message

On 25/04/2015 10:39, Doctor John wrote:
> a drunken McAvoy

A sober McAvoy would never go near dry stain dyking. Too much like hard 
work.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 25-4-2015 10:31, Stephen wrote:
> On 25/04/2015 08:33, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> On 25-4-2015 9:13, Stephen wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks indeed! I love that kind of historical information. Somehow, it
>> finds back its way into a scene or another.The painting of Rosa Bonheur
>> is typical. 19th century ray-tracing! ;-) It would be interesting to
>> work on that.
>>
>
> Did you forget to say things backward? ;-)
> I am not too sure if you mean Rosa Bonheur's paintings or the painting
> of her by Édouard Dubufe?

Typical! I mean /by/ Rosa Bonheur ;-)

>
> 19th century ray-tracing! - Camera obscura?

That and the genre painting, like Ilya Repin for instance.

>
>
>>>
>>> Art not science then?
>>
>> Certainly not ;-)
>>
>
> More like black magic to me. :-)

There is a distinct flavour of that too.

>
>
>>>
>> Yes, and with trace(), using a pigment_map with different contrasting
>> colours will show where the final hues will appear. They can then easily
>> be manipulated into the right combination.
>>
>
> I might dispute the "easily" bit. :-)
>
You are perfectly right of course. More often than not, I don't know 
what I am doing.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 25-4-2015 11:39, Doctor John wrote:
> Posting a bit late, so you've sorted the wall problem.

I did. Just a stupid mistake.

>
> The castle is perfect; however, I'm a little bit concerned about the
> straightness of the field walls - a drunken McAvoy would never have
> produced such.

These walls were a first proof of concept. A bit more irregularity is in 
order indeed. I don't want to think about a drunk McAvoy though. 
However, the walls may control his progress home ;-)

>
> <offers a large quaich of Glenmorangie to Stephen/>

Warms the soul if not the body.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message

On 25/04/2015 12:14, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> I don't want to think about a drunk McAvoy though.

Don't fret yourself. You probably wouldn't notice the difference.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 25/04/15 12:14, Thomas de Groot wrote:
> 
> I don't want to think about a drunk McAvoy though.
> However, the walls may control his progress home ;-)
> 
... and even help us to demonstrate the Ideal Gas Laws (at least in the
proof that I learnt in school)

>>
>> <offers a large quaich of Glenmorangie to Stephen/>
> 
> Warms the soul if not the body.
> 

Thinking about this, how about an empty bottle somewhere near the wall
(or dyke as Stephen insists on calling it). A comatose Ileach would also
be a great addition ;-)

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message