I did this painting and I want to turn into a landscape in blender, I thinking something like a canyon or a river, Is there a way to do this? or Im I doing it the wrong way?
I turned the thing into an .svg and I just want to extrude it manually like you do in sketchup, is this even posible because Im pulling my hairs out of frustration, I legit feel like a retarded person
>>699617Not sure what you're looking for, something like this? Just desaturated your painting and put the black and white as a displacement, fairly low poly
>>699619thanks bud, thats pretty cool, so I guess I could manually repaint each value so Im sculpting it, that would work, is there a way to get rid of those pesky, vertical lines?, but fuck I think you basically nailed it
>>699621I never experimented too much with displacement since it seems to require an ungodly amount of faces to have half decent results. No idea why it's not smoother
>>699621I would love to see that thing nice and smooth, quite a neat idea
>>699623>>699624Two things that may help with the vertical lines: convert to grayscale using a 32-bit float format (EXR is optimal), and then apply enough gaussian blur.Also, make sure that the geo is sufficiently tesselated. Some engines can do this at render time, only where needed in relation to the camera position.
>>699623- Blur your displacement map a little bit before applying it. - try fucking the normals? - Do a slightly lower poly heightmap, then subdivide it and you'll get more control over the ridges Look at around 14:00 in this video, see how he solves it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0yizddw2Jg
>>699627>>699629Could this also possibly be one of Blender many flaws? Will try
>>699627>>699629Simply did the blur, worlds better already
And yes, its smoothed. It just doesn't want to be smooth with displacements for some reason
>>699633Lookin pretty neat.Honestly I'm tempted to give it a go.Brb with results.
>>699637Went with a different approach. I wanted to make it look kind of like a landscape.I did what I could with the original image to make a gradual slope from the top right to bottom left (just overlayed a gradient for that) in grayscale.Then exported 2 images, one with a larger blur to get the general features, and one with a smaller one for details.Then just added 2 displacement maps, one with a larger effect with the larger blur, and one with a relatively small effect for the detail one.It's a bit more billowy and smooth than >>699633 this one that OP did. Though to be honest I prefer the sharper ridges of that one by far. If you just add a subsurf on top of it and set it to adaptive it should smooth it out pretty well.
>>699639Pretty sure were missing something, this should be smooth as a peach. Got 5 subsurf and smooth like crazy. It doesn't get any smoother 6 subsurf also
>>699642Turn down the displacement a bit.Maybe change the modes on it as well. Maybe UV instead of local/global might work better.
couldn't this be done with a vector displacement?
>>699645did it in UV, and yes lowering the levels helps, but I love the high ridges look. I guess it's a pretty demanding displacement job
Applied a few subsurfs to the plane before doing displacement, it seems to allow smoothing a lot more
>>699627I decided to give it a go.Texture prep:* Convert to 32-bpc EXR in ACEScg space using Affinity Photo* Add a black background to prevent the blur from going to white on the borders of the image* Gaussian blur, 10 px for diffuse and 20 px for displacement* Green filter + grayscale for displacement (the filter is unnecessary, just a way of making the values a bit more interesting)3D:* A grid sized with the same ratio as the picture, and 50x50 divisions* Adaptive tessellation, down to 2 px per edge* A bit of gamma correction for the displacement texture in the shader* The grid is curved so the camera field can be filled with the texture
>>699756Couldnt you just use Materialize?
>>699788I don't know what that is. Link?
>>699791Dont wanna fuck around spam filter, try searching for "materialize texture tool".
>>699793I see it's like B2M. That's a fine approach. I would pick Alchemist, however (pic related). Different methods/algorithms though, so different results.