03.12.2009, 19:19
"your buffer tex. appears like some kind of dull open grass field." Cheers mate, I'm thoroughly enjoying you textures too But you're right though, that is exactly what they are. That's the basic idea at the core of the project : textures that look dull at high altitudes so as to create as little repetitions as possible, but have enough detail at low altitudes to fit in the landscape.
RULES :
-Bottom of valleys near rivers : no buffer tex .
-More slope = more buffer tex
-Low areas = less buffer tex
-high areas = more buffer tex
Not a bad idea. As a matter of fact that is precisely what Canon originally did with the texture slot I am using for the 'buffer' texture At first I tried to keep as much of the geographically relevant texture assignment pattern as I could, to benefit from both the 'random buffer' effect and the 'realistic placement' pattern that Canon used. It soon appeared this would be causing issues in many areas, where the two patterns would overlap, creating wide areas entirely covered with the 'Buffer' texture, which made those areas look like defaut Smolensk from 4000+ meters.
I just rather recently drove across Normandy, from Caen to Rennes (via Ste M
RULES :
-Bottom of valleys near rivers : no buffer tex .
-More slope = more buffer tex
-Low areas = less buffer tex
-high areas = more buffer tex
Not a bad idea. As a matter of fact that is precisely what Canon originally did with the texture slot I am using for the 'buffer' texture At first I tried to keep as much of the geographically relevant texture assignment pattern as I could, to benefit from both the 'random buffer' effect and the 'realistic placement' pattern that Canon used. It soon appeared this would be causing issues in many areas, where the two patterns would overlap, creating wide areas entirely covered with the 'Buffer' texture, which made those areas look like defaut Smolensk from 4000+ meters.
I just rather recently drove across Normandy, from Caen to Rennes (via Ste M