A silly question about painted textures and photo textures...

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08 August 2003   #1
A silly question about painted textures and photo textures...

i really cant figure out difference between:::


1. If I have a big-resolution photo....with the exactly bump
and color that i want.....


2.from the same resolution file, iddentical, but, otherwise, painted...


Will the Layout think:

well, this map is photo....so i will not render cool....???

Can anyone explain me this???

thanx.
 
Old 08 August 2003   #2
um... what?
__________________
No animals were harmed in the production of this signature, but millions of electrons were.

Mr Sheen would make a better John Howard.
 
Old 08 August 2003   #3
Re: A silly question about painted textures and photo textures...

Originally posted by ronaldomiranda
i really cant figure out difference between:::


1. If I have a big-resolution photo....with the exactly bump
and color that i want.....


2.from the same resolution file, iddentical, but, otherwise, painted...


Will the Layout think:

well, this map is photo....so i will not render cool....???

Can anyone explain me this???

thanx.


Perhaps posting a few renders will clarify what you are trying to say because I'll be darned if I can figure it out.
__________________
R A N D Y S H A R P
Digital Domain
 
Old 08 August 2003   #4
I think he's asking whether it matters if you use a photo or a painted texture. I say- use whatever you have. As long as it looks good, who cares?
 
Old 08 August 2003   #5
It makes no difference to Lightwave whether the images are hand-drawn/painted or from photography...

They are just different types of images and can both be used in the various texture channels of lightwave... you can even mix them too if you want, together with procedurals and gradients...
__________________
R!ch
 
Old 08 August 2003   #6
ok guys......let me try explain again (I know my english sux, here south america ------------> portuguese is my native language)


i meant:


Evebody says that painted textures goes better than photos.

But, if I have, a photo, that is exactly what I want for texture something, (well, i agree that how will be a photo of i want texture???, but just a supposition...) with a great resolution and if i made too, a painted texture, with the same resolution, etc...

will be difference in the final renderer? if they are iddentical,
except that one is photo and other is painted????

I hope you understand me now....

HUGE THANX
 
Old 08 August 2003   #7
Hmmm... Are you saying that YOU notice some strange difference in the render outputs... or are you just wondering because someone has said there should be a difference?

I can understand that generalization (that painted images work better than photos) since you, as you paint them, have larger controll over pixel detail. Photos can contain lots of hard-to-notice-by-viewing detail that might show up strange when used as textures, especially in bump, spec, diff etc.-channels... BUT (I guess there is no reason to tell you this... but anyway ) nor LW, nor your computer pays any interest or attention to how an image is created or who created it or whatever in this case. It only sees an array of pixels, each with an individual value of RGB.

SO... if you don´t see any problem with your rendered output, I see no reason bothering about whether an image used as texture originally is a photo or a self-painted image. On the other hand; if you DO see strange results on your render (when it comes to surfaces using the texture in question) it might be due to differences in information in the image that you perhaps didn´t notice by viewing it.
__________________
Erik Wernquist
www.turboforce3d.com
 
Old 08 August 2003   #8
No Chagidiel, i am just wondering about it....
Nothing made here! but thanx....your reply gave me some
lights about my doubts.
 
Old 08 August 2003   #9
Using photos
Pro: It's a photo! It has every pore, blemish, etc.
Con: The photo has lighting that you have to overcome plus you have to finesse it to line up with your model.

Using hand painted textures:
Pro: You're in complete control - you can compensate for stretching and other things
Con: It's not a photo! Essentially, the level of "con" is dependent on your skills as a painter


I've seen great work using both methods, so there's no right answer. Personally, I lean towards the latter but I think I want to play a bit with the former.
 
Old 01 January 2006   #10
Thread automatically closed

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.
__________________
CGTalk Policy/Legalities
Note that as CGTalk Members, you agree to the terms and conditions of using this website.
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.