An experiment.................... ::)
Pretty cool. Now all you need is a good displacement map for the ground.
Nice Firearms and a clean ground image. I agree with the displacement.
Cool! ... and agree with the displacement. :)
Agree, nice weapons. Have I mentioned here that there's a plugin for photoshop from NVIDIA that makes what they call 'Normal" maps from colour images that displace really well.
Quote from: bobbystahr on June 05, 2016, 10:10:06 AM
Agree, nice weapons. Have I mentioned here that there's a plugin for photoshop from NVIDIA that makes what they call 'Normal" maps from colour images that displace really well.
Would that be crazybump?
You don't need to do any of this... Also the result from a heightmap generated from a color, especially at this distance is probably never going to look convincing...
However, as I recognize the texture, here is the link to the pack where it's coming from. There is a proper displacement map. http://real-displacement-textures.com/rdt-sand-pack-1.html
I strongly recommend those maps to anyone interested, they are by far the best soil texture I've seen and works wonderfully with Terragen!
The bump is applied in both pics. The first at default, .01. The second is at 1. Take your choice. ???
What happened to the shadows?
Quote from: ajcgi on June 06, 2016, 06:33:53 AM
Quote from: bobbystahr on June 05, 2016, 10:10:06 AM
Agree, nice weapons. Have I mentioned here that there's a plugin for photoshop from NVIDIA that makes what they call 'Normal" maps from colour images that displace really well.
Would that be crazybump?
No, it's a free plugin from NVIDIA
https://developer.nvidia.com/nvidia-texture-tools-adobe-photoshop
see sample from a med res image
It will not work in CC...............CC has its own bump and normal map generator built in. Tried the bump, haven't tried the normal yet. Will shortly...............
Another render............shadows any better?
This one has no bump map, has a normal map from CC in the displacement slot.
The ground looks fine to me; but what happened to the shadows and what is CC?
they seem about the same to me btw
CC is Photoshop on the cloud........... :) And I do not know where the shadows went............and I can't get them back. And I don't know what I did to get rid of them. This is strange...............everything has cast shadows checked, soft shadows is off. There is no cloud cover................just pure sunlight. Any ideas?
Quote from: yossam on June 06, 2016, 01:49:12 PM
CC is Photoshop on the cloud........... :) And I do not know where the shadows went............and I can't get them back. And I don't know what I did to get rid of them. This is strange...............everything has cast shadows checked, soft shadows is off. There is no cloud cover................just pure sunlight. Any ideas?
??? In section render do you click on (Do shadows) and the extra render section do you click on (Do ray traced shadows).
They are both checked.............. ???
I see, CC = PsCloud...too bad in some ways.....and a mighty mystery re: the shadows.... Watching this to see if anyone can figure out what happened. Could happen to anyone and best be prepared.
Are you using ray traced shadows on all parts of the drawing
and is the ground receiving any shadows ?
Yes and yes...........I think I may have it narrowed down. Will post later..........more experiments to make sure. ;D
Found my shadows......................... :P
100% better, wtf were they hiding?
If you turn your bump map up too far your shadows disappear.................learned something today. :-[
You keep saying bump map. Are you using bump (simulated disp no shadows cast off object ) or real displacement ?
The image shader has the option to interpret the image for real displacement.
This is a super crude test just using your first render directly as an image projection onto the ground but with real displacement derived from the image set at .3.
I was using bump maps, normal maps, etc to see which worked better. This one is forced displacement set at .005.
Quote from: yossam on June 06, 2016, 07:32:53 PM
I was using bump maps, normal maps, etc to see which worked better. This one is forced displacement set at .005.
Interesting as to where the shadows went...odd that. I find the forced displacement always looks just that, 'forced' and not really natural...must be the no ray tracing that does that.
Is that ground texture on an imported object or just the ground? If it's the ground wouldn't regular displacement work? Then it may look more natural.
Indeed. It should be ground/planet or a plane, so displacement would be in order, not bump.
Still playin'.............. :P
Quote from: yossam on June 07, 2016, 03:50:39 PM
Still playin'.............. :P
In the surface layer turn smoothing on and you won't have displacement from the terrain coming through(thanx Ulco for that tip long ago)unless of course you want it.
Force Displacement has no effect on the planet. And the "force" just means it is rendering it with the non-raytracing rendering method, there is nothing really "forced" about it. ;) It's true though that the non-raytraced rendering method does not produce quality that is as high, which is why ray-tracing is the default and considered best method. It can't do displacement at present though, which again is what the "force" mode is for (which, to reiterate, only works on non-displaceable objects; some native objects in TG like the Planet, Sphere, and newer displaceable Cube are all natively displaceable and shouldn't have the "Force" option).
- Oshyan