> That would be appreciated. Emilian already reminded me of the normalmap
> feature, so it'd be interesting to compare the two and see which one I  
> prefer.

I don't know if Emilian gave you the notion that these would be competing 
options or not, but the notion isn't correct. You're not technically restricted 
to having either a normalmap or a grain texture, the shader allows you to have 
both, and they also do very different things, so it makes even sense to have 
both.

Think of color variations in smoothly polished wood - these have no distortion 
of the normal, so you wouldn't do them with a normalmap, but a grain overlay  
works just fine. You might want to use a grain texture for details which are 
too small to be explicitly simulated by a normalmap as just color variations 
(because that's computationally and momory-wise much cheaper to do), but 
basically if you have surface structure on the size scale of your standard 
texture, you'd not normally use a grain texture to model  them.

Cheers,

* Thorsten
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:

Build for Windows Store.

http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to