That's the one of the strange Photoshop plugins I was refering to.
Honestly, I can't spot a reason to constantly switch from XSI to
Photoshop to get that bumpmap look ok. The bumpmap generator node
certainly has its right to exist, in this case it doesn't make sense not
to use it...
-André
Axel Akesson wrote:
What about using NVIDIAs plugin for converting heightmaps to bumpmaps?
I don't have any personal experience with it but maybe it helps.
http://developer.nvidia.com/object/nv_texture_tools.html
Cheers,
Axel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of André Adam
Sent: 02 March 2006 16:42
To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
Subject: Re: weird bump mapping..
You're mixing up bumpmaps and heightmaps. A heightmap is what you're likely trying to plug into the bumpmapping port, basically a height description encoded in a greyscale image where you want the bright sport to appear up high in the bump mapping effect.
A bumpmap, and that's what bump-mapping inputs in the render tree expect to be fed, is vector data. Image-wise it is encoded in RGB representing XYZ. These images look pretty colourful and cannot easily be generated manually unless you use some strange Photoshop plugins. To convert heightmaps to bumpmaps you need the bumpmap generator node as suggested by Wayne.
When you got the effect working and want to have a look at the actual bumpmap which got generated by the bumpmap generator, directly plug the bumpmap generator's output into the material's surface input. Then you get to see what the bumpmap actually looks like...
Hope that helps.
-André
Adrian L wrote:
Just getting into XSI ourselves, we have noticed a weirdness when it
comes to bump-mapping. The rendertree seems to add a color2vector node
that only seems to mess up the texture. Is there some workflow that we're missing?
Enabling bumpmapping on the texture image node seems better, but not
very controllable...
Adrian L
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On
Behalf Of Matthew Lowery
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 3:26 AM
To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
Subject: RE: Future XSI versions, comments![Scanned]
I think soft should fix bump mapping before they even think about
adding any new features, xsi's bump mapping is an embarrassment.
m(at)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On
Behalf Of Christopher
Sent: 02 March 2006 09:06
To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
Subject: Future XSI versions, comments![Scanned]
Hello, I have a comment on future versions of XSI. If softimage were
too port fxtree to foundation. And bring in a 3D paint app inside of
XSI and put that in either essentials or advanced. It's a simple
comment nothing mind blowing but just wanted to share.
Christopher
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in
body:
unsubscribe xsi
Disclaimer: The information in this email is confidential and may be
legally privileged.
It is intended solely for the addressee and access to this email by
anyone else is unauthorised.
If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on
it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi
