Jaime Vives Piqueres <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote:

>
>    That looks almost perfect to me, at least for that particular SEM
> picture posted by kmcpeak. And "cheating" seems more or less obligatory
> here, as SEM photography doesn't involves lighting at all...

Thanks. Now that I look at my image again, it doesn't seem so ambiguous after
all. But the longer I stare at it, the 'bumps' want to come back. :-(  With a
planar surface (and not much perspective, or none at all), there seem to be no
real 'depth cues'--other than the faux shadowing.

Post a reply to this message