Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 (edited) all i did was take a picture of my kitchen floor..... make a new material and change type to projection map. add the image..... and I can now use this on anything for example the picture is kindoff dark. (edited) this is the latest picture in this thread Edited February 13, 2005 by Newbert_Zero Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 People probably already know about this but im wondering why would you make a material when you can just take a picture of one? Quote
Bill Smith Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 Try scaling your object! When scaled up does the texture look realistic - tile it - do the tile join well? Lest say: I want to apply materials to a terrain model - picture won't work. I have a large model and want some variation in the material - picture won't work. Pictures have their place - so do decals, procedurral mats etc, etc, etc BS Quote
Bill Smith Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 Yes - it looks quite good. In a realistic/semi realistic setting though the grain size would feel a tad large! BS Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 here is the picture that i used Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 (edited) another picture... this ones crap scroll down. Edited February 13, 2005 by Newbert_Zero Quote
starwarsguy Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 In that latest picture, it looks very tiled and looks like a rush job. Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 new picture for the of wood with even better results. Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 this is the picture that i used for the material used in the picture above Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 compare these two wood materials. the one on the left is the wood-a material that comes with the cd. the one on the right is the one i made with the picture of the floor. Quote
starwarsguy Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 First of all, you really can't compare those. The grain on the right one is much bigger than the left. Also, we're not saying that your method can't be used, just that in some cases, like photorealism, a material would probably be a better choice... Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 im just showing that you can make pretty good looking textures with the click of the camera. and plus doesent this look photorelistic in a way? Quote
jamagica Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 At first site it does, but for close up shots, you'd have to add some displacement..you could do this by making your pic a color decal, then making it Grayscale, and applying that as a displacement/bump Quote
Eric2575 Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 Zero: You made it quick, easy, and it looks good. We have a winner!! Quote
snympi Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 The bump mapping is not a bad idea. I like to see your examples with some bump mapping included. As long as the scaling does not present a problem, I don't see why this could not work even for photorealism. You are using a photo as the source - that kind of makes it photorealistic already Anyway, I'm going to play with it too - brick walls and so on could now be much easier. Quote
Hutch Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 The wood-a.mat on the cd also uses a picture. Look in the images folder after you import it. Quote
steve392 Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 looks good ,I just triede it with the first atribute as bump and second as reflective ,gives a nice render aswell Quote
NancyGormezano Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 im just showing that you can make pretty good looking textures with the click of the camera. and plus doesent this look photorelistic in a way? I think it looks warm, terrific & believable - and I'm all for doing things the simplest way Quote
rumplestilskin Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 I think it can be summed up as: Theres more than one way to skin a cat. Use whatever method makes you happy relative to time and qualiy. *A humbe insertion by Tony* Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 now im trying to find good textures around the house for it. but the only thing i can see that would look good is wood Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 Im gonna do a google search for textures! Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 bleached oak. i accidently saved it as a mov. file Bleach_oak_display.mov Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 more to come.... the only problem is is that the pictures have to be semi large and they cant have a light reflection on the picture. if it does it will make the material look strange. Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 here is another kind of metal Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 A very easy way to get these textures is to go on google images and type in somthing like wood textures. u want somthing big that has a flat picture. then just put it on am and make a new material change type to projection map and then select your picture. walla you have a new material. Quote
starwarsguy Posted February 13, 2005 Posted February 13, 2005 Why are you showing us these? We know that you can apply images to models. The newbiest people in the world know that! Quote
Newbert_Zero Posted February 13, 2005 Author Posted February 13, 2005 im just wondering why you would spend all the time making materials when you could just use a picture for a material and besides im not aplying the image to the model. im making a material with the image..... Quote
luckbat Posted February 14, 2005 Posted February 14, 2005 im just wondering why you would spend all the time making materials when you could just use a picture for a material You'll understand once you get more experienced with A:M. http://www.eggprops.com/cart.php?target=pr...category_id=256 Quote
starwarsguy Posted February 14, 2005 Posted February 14, 2005 Images have their uses, but materials are VERY handy. Quote
Fuchur Posted February 14, 2005 Posted February 14, 2005 Okay... try to tile a image an map it on a complex object... now do it with a material... Second: Zoom in on a decal... look at it... then zoom in on a material... This is like the question: "Why is everyone using Illustrator? Photoshop can do it too..." *Fuchur* Quote
Fuchur Posted February 15, 2005 Posted February 15, 2005 I think you will get the same effect with a map in a material... You will always have the problem of appearing pixels if you zoom in... *Fuchur* Quote
heyvern Posted February 15, 2005 Posted February 15, 2005 Ah yes... procedural materials... This is just me.. but... if I can photograph a piece of wood... and it looks realistic... I just don't have the skills with materials in AM to make them look as good as I can with photoshop and a decal. Plus, more flexibility. I never got into doing those hideously complex nested materials. Pixel size is not an issue... I just determine up front how big I will need it. I have never had any trouble with resolution. I always do the original creation in photoshop at a higher resolution than I will need... then I can resize as needed. Keep this in mind as well... complex materials take more time to render... even if you don't zoom in. Ultimately there is nothing more realistic than reality... so a photo of wood is going to trump the procedural every time... in most cases... sometimes they do look pretty good. All of the surface detail on this is a direct scan from the actual object, I would not have been able to do it otherwise: Just a humble opinion. Vernon "!" Zehr Quote
starwarsguy Posted February 15, 2005 Posted February 15, 2005 I'm not saying that materials are the only way to go. Heck! I love textures! I'm hust saying that each has their own use in certain instances. Quote
heyvern Posted February 15, 2005 Posted February 15, 2005 I'm not saying that materials are the only way to go. Heck! I love textures! I'm hust saying that each has their own use in certain instances. Absolutely young Jedi... I was recently instructed on how to make vertical grooves with a gridturb combiner material... ...WooHoo! Now I can put ridges on ALL of my knobs! I guess my point was... I use to spend hours fiddleing with wood materials to get them right... now I just use different types of wood from a CD of high res photo textures... saves me a ton of time... I mean... how many different types of trees are there anyway? And with all of the deforestation there is probably a lot less now... p.s. I don't use bumps much with my wood... I always sand it very smooth and use a wax finish or sometimes several coats of a polyeurathane varnish over a nice stain... depends on the final use. If it is going to be used outside I will put a sealer on it. Vernon "Old Yanker Workshop" Zehr Quote
heyvern Posted February 15, 2005 Posted February 15, 2005 Just to be fair, I have used procedural wood materials in the past. Here is the very first procedural wood material I created... ALL BY MYSELF... from scratch... It took me a while to get it lined up properly on the model since all the planks had different orientations... that is why I switched to using image decals for wood... and I don't build birdhouses any more... Vernon "Ouch! Damn hammer doesn't work!" Zehr Quote
zacktaich Posted February 15, 2005 Posted February 15, 2005 I am personally undecided on procedurals. They can be used very well, but I've heard arguments against the use of them. I also think that tiled images don't cut it. Here're some really great cross-app (although she does favor Lightwave) texturing tutorials by Leigh van Der Byl, a really talented texture artist. http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=6648 - Part 1 http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=7681 - Part 2 & Part 3 http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=11053 - Part 4 (This one's a little bit harder to apply to A:M, but still interesting reading) http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=17631 - Part 5 http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=74444 - Part 6 (This has a great reference sheet for refraction) Even if you don't follow everything she says word for word, it's great reading and will really deepen your knowledge of texturing. Quote
starwarsguy Posted February 15, 2005 Posted February 15, 2005 Wow! I found that extremely helpful! Quote
msfolly Posted February 15, 2005 Posted February 15, 2005 That was a really nice series of links you posted. Thanks! Quote
JoshB Posted February 16, 2005 Posted February 16, 2005 The major benefit I have found in using Procedural materials over Photo reference mats (or those creating strictly in photoshop) is that a procedural runs completely through the model. Thus, with wood specifically you get end-grain which matches the actual grain of the wood. As Vern's image clearly demonstrates. However, if you are not going to see the end-grain or not see it closely I go with a hi-res photo. I have actually been known to create a procedural material only to do a hi-res render and turn it into a color map to save on render times. J Quote
zacktaich Posted February 16, 2005 Posted February 16, 2005 The major benefit I have found in using Procedural materials over Photo reference mats (or those creating strictly in photoshop) is that a procedural runs completely through the model. Thus, with wood specifically you get end-grain which matches the actual grain of the wood. As Vern's image clearly demonstrates. You can do the same with hand-painted textures, I'm not sure I see your point... It's possible I'm missing what you're speaking of, but I don't see anything that couldn't be done with hand painted textures. Through the use of Bump, Displacement, and Color you can achieve what you describe. Procedurals can only use the same tools as hand painted textures... Procedurals are just not painted, but essentially created by layering turbulences to create color (and many times bump) maps. Quote
heyvern Posted February 16, 2005 Posted February 16, 2005 Actually, the wood end grain issue is a bit of pain with hand painted textures. It is a little tricky if you do a close up and the grains don't "match". Since most wood projects hide the end grain any way... doesn't come up that much. Vernon "!" Zehr Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.