Hello,
I am trying to make some soft rolling hills, with maybe a few large steep hills still "rounded".
I remember that someone in the forum asked about the same thing and used a popular image from Windows OS to show what he was after. Does any one remember that thread? Cant find it. "Rolling Hills" did not help in the search, and thats the only thing I remember about it.
But, cant I just use an image map for this? If so, wouldn't I just make circle(ish) shapes, where the shapes are black on the out most parts and white in the center? Grey scale.
I was thinking about this and can't belive this is the first time I will have tried such a simple and basic landscape :o Its funny how we try to do such complex things on these forums, but don't spend much time talking about more "typical" landscapes.
Thanks.
P.S.
Here is an example of the look I am after. A quintessential fantasy/fairy tail landscape:
[attach=1]
[attach=2]
I bet there's more than one way to do this, but using a TIF with the shapes like you describe could help. I'm not sure that would end it like you want it, though.
Take a look at the USGS data server, I'm sure you could find a little bit of the states that fits your requirements, maybe somewhere in New England ...
Once you add the extra fractal details any recognisable similarity to the original will be lost.
Alternately you could just use a low octave Perlin.
Cheers
Richard
@calico
Yes, it can be difficult to control scale. I would rather not spend all my time just getting the hills right since I have so much else to do after that. But why tiff and not jpg. Whats the difference on a non specific shot in TG2? Don't think I have read much about that in these terms.
@cyphyr
Can you recommend a specific area/place to look into. There is nothing like what I am looking for where I am from. And I have not visited such a place. Searching maps based on a state will be difficult I imagine. But if you know of a real place that has what I am after, than that would be best, I think. I was always lead to believe (by hollywood) that this is what England, Ireland, and scotland look like in person for the most part. Do you know of any specific places on your island that looks like what Im after?
Anyone?
I'll start with the "low octave Perlin" and a tiff and see what happens.
Well that's Hollywood for ya!
I mentioned the USGS data server as I assumed you would be more familiar with US terrain but since you'll be using it out of context I doubt it matters much. Just look for something you like.
You can get the full spread of Ordinance survey UK data free from here (https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendatadownload/products.html), you'll need the "Land-Form PANORAMA" data set in ASCII grid [DTM] or NTF [DTM] format. Open in Global Mapper and export as GeoTiff.
I don't know the sort of place you mean by "Rolling Hills", in the States your geology is much more "spread out" than in the UK, your features are much wider and larger than ours. Nonetheless once your data is loaded into TG you could re-size appropriately.
I would avoid using JPG files, you never know what kind of compression artefacts your going to get.
Cheers and good luck
Richard
Yes, no reason to use image heightmaps with this procedural wonder that is TG2, at least in this case. Try using a power fractal with noise set to perlin billows, low (about .3) noise variation, lead in scale 400, min scale 300, feature scale 330, displacement about 50. Set noise variation low maybe .3. Make it green. I tried this but can't get back to it or get a file out now. This should provide a starting point for the biggest scale features in your tgd file. Cheers Bill
Hey Bill!
Those numbers you gave put me right in the ball park! Thanks a lot :) I will play with this.
@cyphyr
Thanks for that link. I'm just starting to play with this stuff. Its very cool!
Hi
After playing with the numbers Bill gave,, I was able to get pretty much what I wanted in light of image 2 in the OP. But I am having almost no luck with the kind of hills that are in image 1 of the OP. That is, they are basically the same, but in image 1 the hills are smaller in scale and much closer together. I can get hills close together but they are not rounded. I can get hills that are rounded but not close together. I can get hills that I think are the right size but only one or two very spread out hills. The smaller I get the hills, the fewer hills there are.
Am I now to the place where a map makes sense or can someone again get me on the right path with procedurals?
How about combining more than 1 Pf via merge shaders or offsetting
the PF your using via transform shaders?
You can make these with fractals etc.
But i would paint them (basic dots that are blured) or -and use another program Like world machine,Geocontrol or similar for better control .
Hi Kadri,
I came to the same conclusion after playing for a while. The trouble is that making the map is super difficult too. I don't mean the how, just the doing of it.
I found a location to grab satellite data of, that is perfect. And I mean perfect! Google maps, and images of "Palouse, WA". Oh my, its pretty.
In the end I think that a highfield power frack mix will work the best. I just have to get the Sat Data working for me first.
Ok, I got pretty close to what I had in mind. Close enough anyway.
But if you will look at the image. In the area that is read, I would like to be filled with terrain. So that the area under the camera is level and raised to where the top of that first hill is.
[attach=1]
I do not want to sit around all day just playing with seed values trying to get thing "perfect". There must be a way to control this? What can I do here?
You could try attaching a distance shader to your camera with the appropriate values and attach that into a displacement shader. You should get a pretty decent result with the right values
___
Nvm scratch that.. Simple Shape Shader would be the easiest solution
Badger, try masking a displacement shader with a painted shader to raise the foreground. A soft brush should ease the transition. Glad the settings were helpful. Bill
Thanks guys Ill try these too.
My every effort has failed.
I cannot believe that this is as hard as I'm finding it.
All I want is what you see in this image at real world scale.
[attachimg=1]
Anyone?
A basic Perlin fractal should give you this type of terrain. Just don't have a tiny smallest scale. Make your 'smallest scale' the same as your 'feature scale', and maybe lower the default displacement multiplier.
Try this(copy the entire code and paste with ctrl+v into your node network)...
<terragen_clip>
<power_fractal_shader_v3
name = "Fractal terrain 01"
gui_use_node_pos = "1"
gui_node_pos = "-680 640 0"
gui_group = ""
enable = "1"
input_node = ""
gui_use_preview_patch_size = "0"
gui_preview_patch_size = "1000 1000"
seed = "45710"
feature_scale = "500"
lead-in_scale = "2500"
smallest_scale = "500"
noise_octaves = "4"
apply_high_colour = "0"
high_colour = "1 1 1"
apply_low_colour = "0"
low_colour = "0 0 0"
colour_contrast = "0.5"
colour_offset = "0"
colour_roughness = "5"
clamp_high_colour = "1"
clamp_low_colour = "1"
apply_displacement = "1"
displacement_direction = "1"
displacement_amplitude = "250"
displacement_offset = "0"
displacement_roughness = "0.875"
displacement_spike_limit = "0.25"
continue_spike_limit = "1"
adjust_coastline = "0"
coastline_altitude = "0"
coastline_smoothing = "30"
noise_flavour = "0"
noise_variation = "2"
variation_method = "2"
buoyancy_from_variation = "0.5"
clumping_of_variation = "0.25"
noise_stretch_XYZ = "1 1 1"
distort_by_normal = "0"
distortion_by_normal = "5"
lead-in_warp_effect = "1"
lead-in_warp_amount = "0.75"
less_warp_at_feature_scale = "1"
allow_vertical_warp = "0"
blend_by_shader = "0"
blending_shader = ""
fit_blendshader_to_this = "0"
invert_blendshader = "0"
>
</power_fractal_shader_v3>
</terragen_clip>
A regular Perlin terrain should be nice and smooth-rolling, keep the octaves low, I'd use the same smallest scale as I would feature scale. Lead-in scale could also be the same but you might want it to be larger to spread out the features somewhat. I wouldn't use any other 'noise flavour' than Perlin, it should be smoothest.
Try a few 'random seed' clicks on this clip, should be good for such a terrain. You can also mess around with the warp and variation settings, above they're all the defaults from adding a new power fractal terrain in the 'terrain' tab's 'add terrain' button.
Thanks DandelO,
That gives me pretty much exactly the kind of hill I wanted. The trouble is still that there seems to be no way to get the hills sized right.
I need them to look like your (same spacial distance from one another) but no bigger than the reference image. Perhaps even smaller.
Of the things that you mentioned, the only thing I could not find is the "displacement multiplier". I could not even find a result by putting the term onto the search field of the wikki. I have heard it before but could not find a direct reference to where and what it is. Is the displacement multiplier how I get my scale real world?
All I can think of now is to make all of my objects gigantic in order to make the hills look smaller. But I really don't want to do that.
Thanks for the info Martin. You got me as close as I have been.
Try this too please.
I made this more like small hills.
It is mostly like Martins's file but different parameters.
Probably the most different part is the noise variation. I made it zero.
The hills are a little more uniform.
Play with the other parts and i hope you will get what you want Michael.
[attachimg=1]
* Think I meant displacement amplitude, whatever the term, I just meant to lower the displacement in the fractal's displacement tab from the defaults of '2000m' for a regular fractal terrain.
I'd maybe just remove a zero from every scale field(50, 250, 50), and also again from the displacement tab, too(25).
That'll give you the same overall noise but shrink it by a factor of 10. Maybe even try the same scale in each field, the clip above was just an example of a roughly rounded noise. :)
Quotethe clip above was just an example of a roughly rounded noise.
Perfectly (for me) rounded!
Kadri,
I was able to see the differences in your file from Martins, so I was able to find which parameters are important to this. Thank you, the file helped.
So thank you DandelO and Kadri, between the two .tgds I was able to get this finely!
As it happens, "Buoyancy from variation" is an important parameter. But I have never played with it because the details about it in the wiki don't really tell me anything. It appears that its only having an effect now because of some other parameter that was changed in the files. But "Buoyancy from variation" seems to be giving me the most control over the scale. Or at least thats what I think I am seeing?
"Buoyancy from variation" Ok, scratch that part. But I am still getting what I wanted. SO the thanks is still good ;)
"Buoyancy from variation" is a strange parameter though. I thought it was raising my low areas up by entering increasingly larger negative numbers. But is seems to raise the entire terrain, I guess giving the planet a larger volume over all.
It's nice to play with these variables. Buoyancy makes the noise more contrasting, and you can get some nice terrains by carefully playing with it.
Quote from: TheBadger on September 14, 2012, 07:36:20 PM
My every effort has failed.
I cannot believe that this is as hard as I'm finding it.
All I want is what you see in this image at real world scale.
[attachimg=1]
Anyone?
You need to start off by working out how big those features are and setting your scales and displacements accordingly, then set your camera height to human eye level to see how your changes look in 'world space'.
Have a look at this clip, there are some notes attached talking through the process. I've put in some variation, but you might want to pull that back. Using Shader previews let you know what each stage of the process is doing to the greyscale.
Quote<terragen_clip>
<power_fractal_shader_v3
name = "Power fractal shader v3 01"
gui_use_node_pos = "1"
gui_node_pos = "-920 720 0"
gui_group = "Terrain"
enable = "1"
input_node = ""
gui_use_preview_patch_size = "0"
gui_preview_patch_size = "1000 1000"
seed = "63247"
feature_scale = "9"
lead-in_scale = "9"
smallest_scale = "9"
noise_octaves = "2"
apply_high_colour = "1"
high_colour = "1 1 1"
apply_low_colour = "1"
low_colour = "0 0 0"
colour_contrast = "0.8"
colour_offset = "0"
colour_roughness = "0"
clamp_high_colour = "1"
clamp_low_colour = "1"
apply_displacement = "0"
displacement_direction = "1"
displacement_amplitude = "30"
displacement_offset = "0"
displacement_roughness = "0.1375"
displacement_spike_limit = "0.19375"
continue_spike_limit = "0"
adjust_coastline = "0"
coastline_altitude = "0"
coastline_smoothing = "30"
noise_flavour = "0"
noise_variation = "1.4"
variation_method = "2"
buoyancy_from_variation = "0.6125"
clumping_of_variation = "0"
noise_stretch_XYZ = "1 1 1"
distort_by_normal = "0"
distortion_by_normal = "5"
lead-in_warp_effect = "0"
lead-in_warp_amount = "0.5"
less_warp_at_feature_scale = "0"
allow_vertical_warp = "0"
blend_by_shader = "0"
blending_shader = ""
fit_blendshader_to_this = "0"
invert_blendshader = "0"
>
</power_fractal_shader_v3>
<note
name = "Note 02"
gui_use_node_pos = "1"
gui_node_pos = "-600 640 0"
gui_group = ""
gui_node_size = "665.6878744 84.20709383 1"
gui_note_text = "This is an example of the sort of effect we can apply to a greyscale, but not so easily apply to a displacement.

Look up Gain Scaler in the wiki, and have a look at the graph shape. What is happening here, is that we are applying that curve to the greyscale, to bring it towards the curve shape. In this instance, flatter valleys and rounder tops."
gui_note_text_colour = "0 0 0"
gui_note_use_custom_text_size = "0"
gui_note_custom_text_size = "10"
gui_node_colour = "0.9900000095 0.9599999785 0.6100000143"
>
</note>
<note
name = "Note 01"
gui_use_node_pos = "1"
gui_node_pos = "-640 800 0"
gui_group = ""
gui_node_size = "741.8799009 78.84403691 1"
gui_note_text = "Displacement is turned off. I'd rather use values of colour between 0 to 1 to drive a displacement shader, because we can apply all kinds of effects to this greyscale."
gui_note_text_colour = "0 0 0"
gui_note_use_custom_text_size = "0"
gui_note_custom_text_size = "10"
gui_node_colour = "0.9900000095 0.9599999785 0.6100000143"
>
</note>
<displacement_shader
name = "Displacement shader 01"
gui_use_node_pos = "1"
gui_node_pos = "-860 360 0"
gui_group = ""
enable = "1"
input_node = ""
gui_use_preview_patch_size = "0"
gui_preview_patch_size = "1000 1000"
function = "Gain scalar 01"
displacement_direction = "1"
displacement_multiplier = "3"
>
</displacement_shader>
<note
name = "Note 03"
gui_use_node_pos = "1"
gui_node_pos = "-600 440 0"
gui_group = ""
gui_node_size = "658.0590595 88.7843828 1"
gui_note_text = "The moddified greyscale is now used to displace the planet surface. The displacement amount in this case is set within the node, but you could quite easily leave it as 1, instead multiplying the output of the previous node by the amount of your wanted displacement."
gui_note_text_colour = "0 0 0"
gui_note_use_custom_text_size = "0"
gui_note_custom_text_size = "10"
gui_node_colour = "0.9900000095 0.9599999785 0.6100000143"
>
</note>
<gain_scalar
name = "Gain scalar 01"
gui_use_node_pos = "1"
gui_node_pos = "-860 520 0"
gui_group = ""
enable = "1"
input_node = "Power fractal shader v3 01"
gui_use_preview_patch_size = "0"
gui_preview_patch_size = "1000 1000"
gain = "Constant scalar 01"
>
</gain_scalar>
<compute_terrain
name = "Compute Terrain"
gui_use_node_pos = "1"
gui_node_pos = "-940 300 0"
gui_group = "Terrain"
enable = "1"
input_node = "Displacement shader 01"
gui_use_preview_patch_size = "0"
gui_preview_patch_size = "1000 1000"
gradient_patch_size = "20"
smooth_surface = "0"
>
</compute_terrain>
<constant_scalar
name = "Constant scalar 01"
gui_use_node_pos = "1"
gui_node_pos = "-860 560 0"
gui_group = ""
enable = "1"
input_node = ""
gui_use_preview_patch_size = "0"
gui_preview_patch_size = "1000 1000"
scalar = "0.94375"
>
</constant_scalar>
</terragen_clip>
Thanks a lot guys. Everything is understood now. I got just what I wanted! Can't believe this was so hard for me :o
Funny a mountian should be easier than a Molehill :P
Camera is 6'1" off the ground, so scale here is working fine.
[attach=1]
Thanks Dune^^ that may be the first post I have seen on the subject.
Quote from: Dune on September 15, 2012, 04:09:25 AM
It's nice to play with these variables. Buoyancy makes the noise more contrasting, and you can get some nice terrains by carefully playing with it.
I don't know Ulco.
Your first example has noise variation @ 200 with 100 for buoyancy.
Second example has noise variation @ 2 and 80 for buoyancy.
Third example has both set to 0.
From that you can't draw that conclusion. It's a change between 2 parameters and not 1.
In my experience noise variation is a very strong modulator of the noise function.
Noise variation at these high levels acts more likely as "clumping of variation". Resulting in flat areas and sudden increase of localized noise.
You explain and account that sudden increase as contrast because of buoyancy.
You may be right, but I'm just not sure about the reasoning and it's also not really what I see in my experiment. Although those were mostly on clouds, honestly.
You're right, Martin, that it's not as simple as I stated it (nothing is in TG ;)), but low variation and low buoyancy gives an overall smoother gray noise, whereas if you increase them the contrast increases, whether clumpy (with variation up) or more spread out (with low variation, but buoyancy up). I just wanted to point out to our fellow terrageneers that it's nice to see what happens if you play with these numbers, just to understand the workings.
Oh yes absolutely. Playing with it in the way you demonstrated is definitely a good way of learning understanding. In this case the discussed TVR would sort this out for us.