Heightfield Load Question

[jaf]

I was experimenting with very the very basics of heightfield load files, since I use World Machine a lot to create my terrains.  I was under the assumption I could make a black (0,0,0 RGB) Bitmap file with a white (255, 255, 255 RGB) square and see  smooth rectangular box for a terrain in tg2.  I figured there would be "noise", but it could be eliminated by choices in the nodes (like turning off fractal detail.)  However, I couldn't get a plain flat-topped box that I expected.

Doesn't anyone know where this "noise" is coming from or is it simple built in without any controls?

 

[rcallicotte]

Have you checked up the chain to see if somewhere you have some displacement near the beginning or during the chain of nodes down into the node network?

[jaf]

I believe so.  I tried cutting anything I saw that (I) thought could contribute.  Thought maybe something in base colors, but didn't find anything.  No power fractal -- just the heightfield load with fractal detail disabled.

Maybe it has something to do with the size of the white square -- the "noise" is at the edges.  I'll experiment when a render finishes and my New Years celebration is back under control! 

[yossam]

You might try blurring the image in Photoshop or whatever you use. Just save the blurred image as a seperate file in case it's not what you want.

[rcallicotte]

Let us know what you find.  It looks like it could be related to the imported mesh...can't see well from the image above.

[Tangled-Universe]

It's not a real solution, but why not use the simple shape shader instead of an image map shader?

[jaf]

I was just experimenting with  the heightfield load and wanted to get down to the very basics and then seeing what each option would do.  So I thought, what would be simpler than a 2047 x 2047 bmp black square with a smaller white square?  It surprised me when I couldn't get rid of the "noise" or fractal detail (or whatever it is on the edges.)

I got "fired up" by reading the 3D Art Direct magazine yesterday and decided to really attempt to get a better understanding of the program.

[Tangled-Universe]

I was just experimenting with  the heightfield load and wanted to get down to the very basics and then seeing what each option would do.  So I thought, what would be simpler than a 2047 x 2047 bmp black square with a smaller white square?  It surprised me when I couldn't get rid of the "noise" or fractal detail (or whatever it is on the edges.)

I got "fired up" by reading the 3D Art Direct magazine yesterday and decided to really attempt to get a better understanding of the program.

I understand why you thought a 2k bmp would be an easy start, but it's actually not really that simple.
For instance, load that image in an image map shader and use the displacement function within the image map shader.
Now make a similar sized simple shape shader and displace that as well.
I bet for all the money I have that you won't get the same result.
This is because internally colour from bmp's is treated differently than colours from (generated) heightfields.
So in order to learn it the easiest way is to use it as closest to its native functionality, thus a heightfield and not an image map.
I'd recommend using the heightfield generate (from the default scene) or load an actual .ter heightfield using the heightfield load operator as you tried with your .bmp.
To learn the working of every setting should be more succesful then.

Great to hear though the 3D Art Direct issue fired you up
I don't know whether you will sign up for the conference, but I think it's a great opportunity to get 1:1 interaction with advanced users.
For instance, I'm planning a session on the node network and "logic" of TG2.
Coming saturday there's a free introductory session to the webinar. If you have time then join us so you can get a taste of what we have to offer, we'll share some tips/tricks and there's probably enough time for some open Q&A

Cheers,
Martin

[jaf]

Okay, the "noise" comes from the Interpolation method in the Heightfield shader.  Other selections than Catmull-Rom look cleaner (not that that means anything in this non-realistic case.)