"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > > ...(after all, if I'm not mistaken, function images are the only
> > > way to create a height field from a pattern in the first place).
> >
> Just an aside to your discussion, obviously, but...
>
> What about using a regular pigment function in the height field?

You always need an image (= image file or "internal image" aka "function image")
to generate the height field from... or do you know some other way?

> Or a pigment
> function called at <x,0,z> in an isosurface? (Not strictly a heightfield but
> you get the same effect.) Or, of course, you could always write your own
> heightfield macro...
>
> As always, plenty of ways to skin a cat... :)

At other occasions I'd fully agree with you (after all, POV is mostly
"tri-vial", you know ;)), but we're talking specifically about height_field
objects here.

(Well, the isosurface solution won't work as you described anyway, because it
needs some gradient mixed in to act as a height field substitute :P)

Post a reply to this message