 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Op 01/05/2021 om 17:22 schreef jr:
> hi,
>
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degroot org> wrote:
>> I was thinking, among other things, about the El Capitan half dome...
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Capitan
>>
>> Note that granitic landscapes/formations look rather featureless as far
>> as textures are concerned. They have no/little internal layering, and
>> weathering is mostly 'rounding' the rocks.
>
> had not heard of 'El Capitan' before. 900+ metres of sheer cliff, just .. wow.
> cannot really imagine, but feel one would feel distinctly ant-sized standing at
> its base. (America, huh? _everything_ is big in America! :-))
>
Closer to home (Europe) the cores of the Alps are granites. Bretagne,
Scandinavia and Scotland are also ancient mountain range cores were
granites are common.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hi,
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> Op 01/05/2021 om 17:22 schreef jr:
> > ...
> Closer to home (Europe) the cores of the Alps are granites. Bretagne,
> Scandinavia and Scotland are also ancient mountain range cores were
> granites are common.
in Aberdeen it's in the "moniker" - "granite city".
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberdeen#Landmarks>
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Op 2-5-2021 om 11:10 schreef jr:
> hi,
>
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> Op 01/05/2021 om 17:22 schreef jr:
>>> ...
>> Closer to home (Europe) the cores of the Alps are granites. Bretagne,
>> Scandinavia and Scotland are also ancient mountain range cores were
>> granites are common.
>
> in Aberdeen it's in the "moniker" - "granite city".
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberdeen#Landmarks>
>
I didn't know that :-)
You may be interested, like others, now that we are concentrating on
granites (and other rocks) as used in monuments, by the following text I
came across on the web today:
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/earth-sciences/sites/earth-sciences/files/earth_sciences_geotrail_graveyard_geology.pdf
Very instructive reading indeed.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Op 30-4-2021 om 19:57 schreef Bald Eagle:
> Have you tried doing a sequence of objects, with changing smooth-step thresholds
> to see what effect that has? There's also the amount of turbulence applied
> which will affect how the underlying pattern looks.
>
Attached a set of step noise patterned granites. Variations of the
turbulence value just changes the distribution of the different grains.
Most interesting is the use (1) of the turbulence within a warp{}
pattern and (2) the use of, especially, octaves, lambda, and omega
values. Thus, the two last renders on the bottom row, produce the best
granite pattern, imo.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'stepnoise_granites.jpg' (295 KB)
Preview of image 'stepnoise_granites.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Finally, using a blending technique developed by Tekno Frannansa, The
attached granite, based on the latest preceding one, looks also the most
natural!
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'dakotagrains_test_sn7.jpg' (29 KB)
Preview of image 'dakotagrains_test_sn7.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
For your judgment again.
A weathered, granite, boulder has been hit at and a piece broke off.
Inside: the latest version with warp {turbulence Turbulence octaves 2
lambda 1 omega 2}
Outside: the blurred/blended version of the above
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'granitetest.jpg' (85 KB)
Preview of image 'granitetest.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> Finally, using a blending technique developed by Tekno Frannansa, The
> attached granite, based on the latest preceding one, looks also the most
> natural!
>
> --
> Thomas
Hi! I could imagine it for an outdoor landscape. But for other closer framed
use, I presently can't say that I prefer it over the other results so far:
Something still feels "blurry" about it. Sorry to be that vague. I still believe
it could be due to something default in the specular component / or maybe the
camera has aperture? / or there is just no normal bump distortion at all which
could suffice to lead to this perceived lack of contrast?
At this stage, to properly evaluate the patterns, a close up 1000+ px side
render from less than 1 meter distance and more than 10 cm area visible carrying
your graduated floor now really seems absolutely necessary to see anything.
I feel like I'm spoiling myself a movie by looking at it from a phone streamed
screener file :-D
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Op 3-5-2021 om 17:10 schreef Mr:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> Finally, using a blending technique developed by Tekno Frannansa, The
>> attached granite, based on the latest preceding one, looks also the most
>> natural!
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
> Hi! I could imagine it for an outdoor landscape. But for other closer framed
> use, I presently can't say that I prefer it over the other results so far:
>
> Something still feels "blurry" about it. Sorry to be that vague. I still believe
> it could be due to something default in the specular component / or maybe the
> camera has aperture? / or there is just no normal bump distortion at all which
> could suffice to lead to this perceived lack of contrast?
>
I am afraid you need to be more explicit because I do not really
understand. What is blurry here? I see rather /crisp/ minerals in a
random pattern. Maybe I should post the code? you could test it better I
suppose.
> At this stage, to properly evaluate the patterns, a close up 1000+ px side
> render from less than 1 meter distance and more than 10 cm area visible carrying
> your graduated floor now really seems absolutely necessary to see anything.
>
I truly cannot imagine what you can gain by such a render. What are you
looking for exactly? If I do what you say, you will see a bunch of
coloured pixels, or am I thinking in the wrong direction?
> I feel like I'm spoiling myself a movie by looking at it from a phone streamed
> screener file :-D
>
That would be a sorry business indeed. However, I still wonder /what/
you see exactly (or do not see)...
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> For your judgment again.
This is pretty spectacular, as was the prior ovus example.
I think what Maurice is trying to point out is the "frosted" look of the blurred
pattern.
I think the earlier prototype StepNoise example was more impressive than the
current iteration.
And I'm not sure why you chose to do several experiments with start and end both
equal to 0.5 - as that is just the cells pattern.
But I must say that I really like this frosted look for an outdoor, weathered
piece of natural stone, as this is really what it looks like, with dust, and
evaporated rain, and pollen, etc. Adding that displacement or normal really
gives it that natural look as well.
I think Maurice is looking for that lack of micro-surface texture that leads to
a lot of air - which has a different ior than the minerals and leads to that dry
paper / freshly applied transparent tape look. Polishing, wetting, and waxing
gives it that sharp, crisp, high-contrast look with more saturated colors and
clearer delineations between the grains.
At least that's what I'm speculating.
However, all in all, this is very pleasing, and extremely encouraging progress!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
A few more comments:
Op 03/05/2021 om 17:10 schreef Mr:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> Finally, using a blending technique developed by Tekno Frannansa, The
>> attached granite, based on the latest preceding one, looks also the most
>> natural!
>>
>> --
>> Thomas
>
> Hi! I could imagine it for an outdoor landscape. But for other closer framed
> use, I presently can't say that I prefer it over the other results so far:
>
Yes. Please note that the "blended" cells texture /is/ for the
weathered, outdoor, aspect of any granitic rock you may come across. The
"fresh" look is when such a boulder is broken. For granitic landscapes,
this texture /as is/ would not be convenient and a much simpler one
should replace it, for instance something based on one of those
landscape textures created by Jaime Vives Piqueres.
Anyway, a combination of "weathered" and "fresh" is shown in my image
GraniteTest.jpg, posted a bit earlier.
> Something still feels "blurry" about it. Sorry to be that vague. I still believe
> it could be due to something default in the specular component / or maybe the
> camera has aperture? / or there is just no normal bump distortion at all which
> could suffice to lead to this perceived lack of contrast?
>
Nothing of the sort I believe. The camera is a standard one (no
aperture) but the environment is just a white featureless space. Maybe
that is causing your "lack of contrast"?
As for the finish, the following is used (based on code provided by Ive):
//start code---------------------------------------------
#macro Dull_Highlights()
specular 0.05
roughness 0.1
#end
finish { //frosted version
diffuse albedo 0.6 brilliance 1.5
Dull_Highlights() // a small amount of highlights for realism
}
//end code---------------------------------------------
> At this stage, to properly evaluate the patterns, a close up 1000+ px side
> render from less than 1 meter distance and more than 10 cm area visible carrying
> your graduated floor now really seems absolutely necessary to see anything.
>
I shall render a 2048x2048 px "fresh" granite image today. Don't be
surprised: it is not really believable any more as a granite, but it may
generate comments towards a better code, and that is ultimately, the
purpose of this exercise.
> I feel like I'm spoiling myself a movie by looking at it from a phone streamed
> screener file :-D
>
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
