Just a simple rig to simultaneously do XYZ projection of image maps based on one in Y mode.
Cool! Thanks Jordan. I've been working on something like that as well (with the get normal), but always dumped again because of the need for a compute terrain (which I often don't use for speed sake), but actually a tex coordinates from XYZ is enough, I noticed.
I made a slight improvement; to get the ghosting out attach all masks to the breakup as well and set all breakups to 2.
Good idea on the breakup. I was going to put in a hardness slider for the maps but actually totally forgot.
I think actually with a hardness slider, and disabling mask by coverage (which would kill breakup) may provide a better result. I think coverage mode is where we get those areas that just don't get displaced for some reason; really noticeable when trying to detail voronoi or fake stones.
Quote from: WAS on April 26, 2022, 10:19:37 PMJust a simple rig to simultaneously do XYZ projection of image maps based on one in Y mode.
Hmmm, I'm not completely sure what this is but I know it's going to be handy once I figure it out WAS! Thanks for sharing. :)
When you use image maps, whether for displacement, or colour, it only works in one mode. For a sprawling landscape, espcially when not viewing it at at a straight angle on an axis, you'll have to set the image maps projection mode accordingly. Kinda like how you set it to UV for an object, for the TG sphere, you have to manually plan it to XYZ angles. Be default it's on Y, which works for creating terrain from displacement, or colouring a relatively flat area, but for vertical cliff displacement and texturing, you'll have to use X and Z projection, to cover X facing cliffs and Z facing cliffs. Otherwise Y would just stretch on those faces.
This just takes care of mapping the different directions of XYZ based on Get Normal.
I knew it was going to be handy! I can see how useful this will be. Thanks for sharing and the very good explanation.
With a color adjust you'd have more control than by plain breakup, but the breakup can be adjusted too, and actually acts as a color control in the grey area, but not with 3 variables.
Quote from: Dune on April 28, 2022, 01:28:25 AMWith a color adjust you'd have more control than by plain breakup, but the breakup can be adjusted too, and actually acts as a color control in the grey area, but not with 3 variables.
Wonder if using the image maps as greyscales or if displacement just as is, would help. The breakup would then be tightening in to the structures.
Actually, that seems to work really well using noise as breakup. Here is a quick test where we are looking between X and Z axis, and I don't seem to notice any ghosting or merging of two locations of noise. All seems uniform and sharp as if looking at the noise just rotated between X and Z.
Ugh sorry for the PNG. I'm not sure what's going on with my screenshot program. Used to remember filetype settings just fine.
Yeah, that looks very good. The noise is of course 3D, and would influence the X and Z projection in equal ways, I'd say. A new era of rock sculpting lies ahead of us ;)
3D? The noise is a 2D raster. It's a image map? This is kinda simulating a 3D noise, though.
The fractal breakup noise.
skip that, I was answering to the wrong thread
Quote from: Dune on April 29, 2022, 03:15:25 AMThe fractal breakup noise.
Oh yeah, no, I mean using the image map 2d noise as fractal breakup. Nothing procedural/3D here besides the result.