Currently it seems that the top most finish in a layered texture overrides all
finishes below it.  This is usually undesirable, and while it can sometimes be
overcome, it would be nice to have a property that allows one to specify the
degree to which a texture is applied.  This would be similar to what transmit
does with colors by allowing the underlying color to show through, except it
would work for the entire texture, including the finish and normal properties.


I would also like to see the finish statement changed so that it would able to
accept functions and patterns much like pigments or normals.  I also would like
to see the ambient vector be changed from a color 3 vector to a full rgbft
vector.  This would allow for unlit parts of objects to be striking
transparent, and the lit portions less visibly so, which is useful for certain
things involving the alpha channel.

It would also be nice to have the specular float value changed to a color vector
(roughness should stay float, as it determines the size of the highlight).



-Reactor

Post a reply to this message

"Reactor" <rea### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Currently it seems that the top most finish in a layered texture overrides all
> finishes below it.  This is usually undesirable, and while it can sometimes be
> overcome, it would be nice to have a property that allows one to specify the
> degree to which a texture is applied.  This would be similar to what transmit
> does with colors by allowing the underlying color to show through, except it
> would work for the entire texture, including the finish and normal properties.
>
>
> I would also like to see the finish statement changed so that it would able to
> accept functions and patterns much like pigments or normals.  I also would like
> to see the ambient vector be changed from a color 3 vector to a full rgbft
> vector.  This would allow for unlit parts of objects to be striking
> transparent, and the lit portions less visibly so, which is useful for certain
> things involving the alpha channel.
>
> It would also be nice to have the specular float value changed to a color vector
> (roughness should stay float, as it determines the size of the highlight).
>
>
>
> -Reactor

I think the program is supposed to behave this way. For instance, if you don't
use transmit or filter, then the top-most texture's pigment will completely
obscure any underlying textures' pigments. If you want different finishes then
you'll have to use a texture_map.

-Mike

Post a reply to this message

>
> I think the program is supposed to behave this way. For instance, if you don't
> use transmit or filter, then the top-most texture's pigment will completely
> obscure any underlying textures' pigments. If you want different finishes then
> you'll have to use a texture_map.
>
> -Mike



My experience has been that the finish declared last is applied to all of the
object, even when in a texture_map statement.
From the documentation:
>Note: transformations are not allowed inside a finish because finish items cover
>the entire surface uniformly. Each of the FINISH_ITEMS listed above is described
>in sub-sections below.

This precludes layered and patterned finishes.

-Reactor

Post a reply to this message

"Reactor" <rea### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> My experience has been that the finish declared last is applied to all of the
> object, even when in a texture_map statement.
> From the documentation:
> >Note: transformations are not allowed inside a finish because finish items cover
> >the entire surface uniformly. Each of the FINISH_ITEMS listed above is described
> >in sub-sections below.
>
> This precludes layered and patterned finishes.
>
> -Reactor

Hmmm... it would make more sense for the finish to be applied on a per-texture
basis, so that there would be some variance when a texture_map is used.

-Mike

Post a reply to this message

Le Sun, 13 Jul 2008 21:54:26 -0400, SharkD a modifié des petits morceaux
de l'univers pour nous faire lire :

> "Reactor" <rea### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> My experience has been that the finish declared last is applied to all
>> of the object, even when in a texture_map statement. From the
>> documentation:
>> >Note: transformations are not allowed inside a finish because finish
>> >items cover the entire surface uniformly. Each of the FINISH_ITEMS
>> >listed above is described in sub-sections below.
>>
>> This precludes layered and patterned finishes.
>>
>> -Reactor
> 
> Hmmm... it would make more sense for the finish to be applied on a
> per-texture basis, so that there would be some variance when a
> texture_map is used.
> 
> -Mike

Why would you tie the finish/pattern to the pigment ?
The need is for a real patterned finish. The syntax might need to evolve 
for such feature.

Finish are rather like Normal: the first layer wins.

UML readers can have a look at page 18 to 21 
of http://jgrimbert.free.fr/crayon.pdf

page 18 is the data model of povray 3.6 (DATA, not SDL!)
next pages are suggestions for a more homogenous data model.
(from page 20, texture is suppressed from the Data model: once again, 
DATA, no implication on SDL, just like with Material...)

Post a reply to this message