Thanks Garry and Aidan, Aidan: >Two shakes of a lambs tail is when you would have it done by [ as we say here in Ireland, one of many strange ways to denote time passing :)
... yeah, we got that in New Zealand too. BUT.... sorry to sound so defeatist so yes, it's on, I'm gonna add a thing to my repertoire. Garry: > Sorry if I'm totally missing what it is you're saying . .... Nope, you're far righter than me and the info is, as it usually is from niagara: pure gold. My latest proj and I realised I was sick of sea scapes (one x big analytic flat thing with glass and brushing and one "sea" is more or less in place). But then I realised that a "land" landscape needed totally other solutions and that short-cuts would not be forgiving at my resolutions. For example I can not import bitmaps of any decription that are of less resolution than my render for obvious reasons. Then I saw WM and thought maybe here's a shortcut that's possible. Then Aidan ganged up on me. Obviously the place to start is to see just exactly what I can do with the RS tools. List says that the tools are there, sample pix posted by folk say the same, render times are not an issue for me, so it's good bye from here while I head off into manual etc. However I might still pop for the WM serious version since it won't break the bank and looks like fun. Thanks again Neil Cooke ----- Original Message ----- From: "studio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 4:01 PM Subject: Re: WorldMachine and RS and Displacement and Height maps ... ADDENDUM > > The WM thing, for me, was the 8k x 8k pixel file size which is slightly > > smaller than I would prefer but I could live with it, anyway it's what > > caught my eye. > > Neil Cooke > > Hi Neil : > > I could only guess that 8K would more than likely be for a terrain > that one may be flying a camera over . I know that you're probably > _THE_ high res artist on this list , but 8x8K rendered pixels and > 8x8K maps and meshes are 2 different animals , of course . > > I would hazard a guess that RS could probably , with some finessing , > give a user suitably high detailed meshes (for stills) at 1x1K . In my > experience it seemed to depend on how close to the mesh you placed your > camera . Shots from space ... lower res , closeups of a ridge would re- > quire a user to isolate said ridge and re-interpolate in WM (if it > offers that functionality) . > > Bringing an 8K map into RS in order to zoom into a tiny area of that > map and maintain detail might be overkill ... as in 'kill your machine' . > > Sorry if I'm totally missing what it is you're saying . > > Garry Curtis > http://www.niagara.com/~studio > > > > > >
