I can't seem to get this to work. Is there a bug in Bryce? No matter how many times I try to tile using this feature, it never matches up to any side. I've tried North, South, East and West. I duplicate the terrain, select a tile direction and click on Fractal, but it doesn't match up. Arrrgh!


<strong>bandolin</strong><br />
[Former 3DS Max forum coordinator]<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php">Homepage</a> ||
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/sitemail/">SiteMail</a> ||
<a href="http://excalibur.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?user_id=70375">
Gallery</a> || <a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/index.php?username=bandolin">
Freestuff</a>
<p><em>Caution: just a hobbyist</em></p>

This any help......I have just done these for an image I am working on. BTW have you got the 5.01 or whatever update installed. may be to do with not having that.

The greatest part of wisdom is learning to develop the ineffable genius of extracting the "neither here nor there" out of any situation...."

I think you're doing it backwards... You have to make each tile as a new terrain. It doesn't change already existing ones. (Such as those made by replication or duplicating.)

Barbequed Pixels?

Your friendly neighborhood Wings3D nut.
Also feel free to browse my freebies at ShareCG.
There might be something worth downloading.

No You duplicate the first fractal terrain, and then click tile direction and then click fractal again. If you make completely new terrains each time they never match up.

The greatest part of wisdom is learning to develop the ineffable genius of extracting the "neither here nor there" out of any situation...."

1-Create terrain 2-Go to terrain editor 3-raise resolution (I often use 512) 4-In Editing Tool panel, click New 5-Then select fractal type, then holding down Shift key, click fractal type button-accept (OK) 6-In main display, edit terrain to liking (here I increased height Y axis) 7-Make copy and paste 8-Hold down Shift key and hit right arrow (east) key 8 times 9-Hold down Alt (nudge) key and hit left arrow (west) key 2 times. 10-with second terrain still selected go back to terrain editor 11-In editing tools panel fractal type click on East then holding down Shift key, click fractal type button-accept 12-Copy second terrain and paste 13- Hold down Shift key and hit down arrow (south) key 8 times 14- Hold down Alt key and hit up arrow (north) key 2 times 15-repeat steps10-11 but this time click South then holding down Shift key, click fractal type button-accept 16- Copy third terrain and paste 17- Hold down Shift key and hit left arrow (west) key 8 times 18- Hold down Alt key and hit right arrow (east) key 2 times. 19- with third terrain still selected go back to terrain editor 20- In editing tools panel fractal type click on West then holding down Shift key, click fractal type button-accept

This completes this set of tiled terrain.
Points:
Make copy of the terrain just created
Hold down Shift key and hit arrow keys 8 times for large movement
Hold down Alt key and hit arrow keys 2 times for nudge back to align terrains.
Right arrow=east
Down arrow=south
Left arrow=west
Up arrow=north
Hold down Shift and click fractal type button after selecting tile direction

Gosh, I hope this helps! LOL

Nice little tutorials Cho and Quest, never did it before, but it looks farely easy, thank you guys ! :D

Well that is certainly a more detailed explanation than mine, and I actually learnt something as well. I never thought to use the shift key to move the terrains. Thanks for that tip.

The greatest part of wisdom is learning to develop the ineffable genius of extracting the "neither here nor there" out of any situation...."

That looks great Quest. Thanks. I'll try it out this evening. Geez, Quest. You should open a Bryce college online. Create an info-mercial and have Sally field offer all the benefits of a Bryce degree.


<strong>bandolin</strong><br />
[Former 3DS Max forum coordinator]<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php">Homepage</a> ||
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/sitemail/">SiteMail</a> ||
<a href="http://excalibur.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?user_id=70375">
Gallery</a> || <a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/index.php?username=bandolin">
Freestuff</a>
<p><em>Caution: just a hobbyist</em></p>

Hmm, I can't seem to get the last terrain to matchup on either the east or north faces. The other three worked like a charm though. Why do you have to press the Shift key? I find it exaggerates the terrain elevation.


<strong>bandolin</strong><br />
[Former 3DS Max forum coordinator]<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php">Homepage</a> ||
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/sitemail/">SiteMail</a> ||
<a href="http://excalibur.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?user_id=70375">
Gallery</a> || <a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/index.php?username=bandolin">
Freestuff</a>
<p><em>Caution: just a hobbyist</em></p>

Aye, there is a much easier answer than going through all of this, Bandolin. Don't bother tiling terrains, it's a waste of time, energy, and space in Bryce. Instead, just raise the resolution of your main terrain, and generate a more complex fractal. Use 2048x2048. It won't kill your computer, it's just kinda slow when running filters in the Terrain Editor. This will produce the same results as four 512x512 terrains, without the headaches. Originally they made tiling because Bryce 3d (it moves!) didn't support terrain source textures past 1024. Bryce 5 takes care of that problem, and makes tiling obsolete.

I tried this over and over with the manuals and even Kitchens' Real World Bryce and never could get it to work. I cried like a little girl and never tried again.

This is not my "second childhood". I'm not finished with the first one yet.

Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana.

"I'd like to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather....not screaming in terror like the passengers on his bus." - Jack Handy

Okay first, Theres really no real need to hold down the Shift key when you hit the fractal type button, its just a habit Ive gotten into after reading several books. Some suggest you hold down the shift key, others dont.

Bandolin, obviously something is amiss. You can see from my example that it matched up brilliantly. And Ive done several very large (planet sized) resolution tiles since without problem. Theres something youre not doing right. Assuming you started your tiles as I did, first going east then south and finally west, perhaps you didnt make the right selection in geographic direction. Hummm, I wonder, is your startup default.br5 (or default.br4) file set up so that you know exactly in which direction your scene is going?

The best way to create tiles is to follow a pattern, that is: starting with your first terrain, create say, 3 terrains going north. Then 1 terrain going east, 2 terrains going south. Then 1 terrain going east again and then 2 terrains going north etc. You follow this zigzagging pattern in the same winding direction.

Bryce creates one very large terrain when you first create the first one. It then reveals the rest of it as you tile. It is not created as you tile. So any terrain you create is really only part of a larger one, like a mini world. Each tile offers a continuing new scenario of the layout of that hidden master terrain.

The hold down shift hit arrow keys 8 times works only if you do not change the original parameter size of the terrain. You can change it vertically along the Y axis and still hold true to 8. But once you change the parameter size of the terrain (along the z and x axis) the 8 no longer holds true. Depending on how large you scale it, you may have to hit it 16 times to butt the terrain grids together.

Chohole, page 210 of Susan Kitchens Real World Bryce defines the nudge keys:

Shift+nudge=1/2 grid/unity unit
Nudge=1/4 grid/unity unit
Alt+shift=1/8 grid/unity unit
Alt+nudge=1/256 grid/unity unit

Message edited on: 04/11/2005 18:30

To illustrate the zigzag pattern mentioned (white arrows). 16 terrain tiles each terrain given a different family color then textured.

It occurred to me Bandolin that these 2 terrains look alike but the furthest one at a more inclined angle due to POV of image. What do you think?

The very, vitally, important part that Quest ommited from his brilliant tutorial. Although it is shown in the picture.

Right above the section for Tile North....

Turn off Random Extent.
Turn off Random Position.
Turn off Random Character.

That way it's the same fractal, just tiled north or south or east or west.

Message edited on: 04/11/2005 21:23

What are you supposed to do about the creases between the terrains? Do you just paint them out in the editor?

Hummm, perhaps Im wrong but arent those off by default Xenic? Good point nevertheless! TobinLam, if you bring the terrains close enough together, you shouldnt see the creases generally speaking. For instance, in my first illustration of this post I used 2 alt+nudges to get the terrains close enough so that you couldnt see the seams. In my zigzag post above I found that I needed 8 alt+nudges get them to bud. You have to zoom in close in the top viewport to see if they are budding together. It depends on the terrain and the texture you put on them but if worst comes to worst, you can always postwork them out.

Message edited on: 04/11/2005 21:35

Message edited on: 04/11/2005 21:37

Aye, but back to my point, people. You're missing something terribly crucial here.

You don't NEED to tile terrains anymore. That feature is obsolete since they allowed for larger source resolutions than 1024. There is absolutely NO reason to tile terrains, period. It's a complete waste of time.

Also, like TobinLam pointed out, you cannot rid yourself of these edge artifacts. Which means that tiling is not only useless in the first place, but useless in the second place as well. Add those two together, or even multiply them, and what do you get? COMPLETELY useless!

And to make matters even worse, what if you wanted to adjust a terrain? What if you wanted to erode one, or do ANYTHING to it? Well, there goes your entire tile set. Good luck trying to arbitrarily filter two terrains, much less four or 16. In case you weren't keeping score, that is useless x three. Useless cubed, if you will... Normally I don't care about stuff, and normally I don't get frustrated about stuff, but for the love of Dragons, people! Knock this tiling-talk off, it's just silly...!

Message edited on: 04/12/2005 00:22

you can erode any of the tiles you want.Just have to set your brush to erode change the size of it and erode away. wont be able to go over seams, but everything inside is changeable.You can even change resolutions the change them back to get say deeper eroded parts. also you could just make the terrain the size you want by using the attributes button.Change the default size toanything you want (within reason) also goto top view with the default size terrain and 16 clicks of any one arrow will move the terrain exactly flush.If you duplicate a terrain all you realy need to do is flip it x or z after it was moved by the clicks.

"Reinstall Windows" is NOT a troubleshooting step.

Please refer to post #18.

Okay, LSD, I think you are totally wrong trying to dismiss a perfectly viable Bryce feature. I truly enjoy it and find few other programs that do the same. You cant tell me that because a user cant find it within themselves to bring 2 terrains together that they should forego the whole technique. Thats ludicrous! Especially from an artist such as yourself who advocates postwork! Theres more here than meets LSDs eyes, to be sure. There is no way, anyone can compensate for this feature otherwise. Now, I must admit, I havent at all tried Moyo, but aside from that, what other program will allow the user to investigate readymade worlds just a few clicks away from their computer and at this price? Nonsense! I see loads of potential here unless something else takes its place.
P.S. LSD, where did you hear that this feature is obsolete? If you can show us that, I would be beholding. Thank you!

Message edited on: 04/12/2005 01:25

Well, Quest, I'll stop ranting, I was just having some fun!
(and I hope nobody took me too seriously, although I am totally right)

Quest, my problem is your logic, here. The fractals that generate the tiled terrains are NO different than the fractals that generate untiled terrains, only the scale is different. You aren't exploring anything you wouldn't be exploring in ONE terrain, which you can actually make all-at-once with the TE. And if you crank up the resolution on ONE terrain, you'd actually be getting way more detail out of a given fractal when you regenerate it. (with all three randoms off, of course)

It's not a mystery what will happen in the unmade-as-of-yet tiles, any more than it would be a mystery to fly your camera around to the other side of a single terrain.

Basically, it's a useless "feature", much like Bryce's rainbows or the Bryce programmer's faces in the moon easter egg. The only reason to use it would be to piece together terrains of 1024 or less resolution, which as I've pointed out in multiple ways is completely useless.

Don't waste your time tiling terrains, just make a huge one with a really complex fractal. Even better, ditch the fractal generators in Bryce and go for something entirely more potent, such as Photoshop-rendered fractals, or the wonderous KPT5 Noize filter. It's ridiculous to waste energy on a technique that is entirely useless...

It's also ridiculous to type a bunch about something you don't care for. I am now celebrating the Ridiculous. Laugh if you must! (sorry, Quest, cross-posting a bit is messing us up!) I didn't HEAR that it was obsolete, I'm telling you that it IS obsolete because of the dozen or so reasons I listed. Scroll up and read them, and you will agree with me.

Message edited on: 04/12/2005 01:27

y Ive pretty much said the same thing. kinda :) "also you could just make the terrain the size you want by using the attributes button.Change the default size to anything you want (within reason)"this is what you ment isnt it? should have put this in last. just made a 10,000 x 3000 x 10,000 single terrain. default is 81.92 x 20.48 x 81.92 no need to tile unless you need the 4x4 format for in game terrains (like for comanche 4 and blackhawk down pc games):)

"Reinstall Windows" is NOT a troubleshooting step.

Right here, Quest. Check it out.

You have not answered my question and Ill not bate you further. But in comparison, Id like to see one of your Bryce generated complex ready made terrains that this feature cannot hold a light to and in as much time. I believe you elucidate yourself my friend. Yes, youre good, but not that good! You will have to show me.

Are you insane, are you trying to show me a 128 bit resolution as compared with a 512 resolution compared image? There is no comparison. The 512 takes it every time. Thats why I make my terrains at least 512. I dont see what it is youre showing me here.

I suck at Bryce, Quest... It's not that, I don't mean to be arrogant towards you. Forgive me. Let's proceed : You're using the tiling feature to generate more detail, right? You wouldn't be using it for size, because you would just use the scaling for that purpose... You are using the tile-maker to try to get more out of a certain randomly generated Bryce fractal, am I correct? If so, then this feature is useless for this reason : Because all of the possbile necessary detail you can get can also be achieved by increasing the resolution. Create a terrain, go to the Terrain Editor. Select your "style" from the list on the left for fractals. Stock resolution is 128x128. Then you click fractal until you find one that looks interesting or useful for your scene... This is the process in question, correct? Now, you turn off all three randoms in the fractals list, and increase your source resolution to 2048 x 2048 or godforbid 4096, and RE-run the fractal seed. With all three randoms off, Bryce generates a fractal map for the new, greater resolution with the same, original seed. So now, you have a mesh developed by 4096x4096 points, 16.7 million points, weighing in at 33,554,432 polys or so. Our 128x128 terrain has 16,384 points describing it's geometry, and your 512x512 terrain has 262,144 points describing IT'S geometry. Now, divide the point-difference. A 4,096 x 4,096 resolution terrain has as much detail as 64 512x512 terrains, tiled or untiled. It has 1,024 times the detail of a 128x128, stock terrain. So, you could go crazy trying to equal the detail you would get from ONE big terrain by making dozens, if not hundreds of smaller ones. Why bother? If you need more details, just make one huge terrain, and stretch it out. Here's a quick screenshot showing the difference, using the exact process I described.

And a textured version. There is NO bump in this material, all shadows you see are geometry-based. Notice how smooth and boring the 128x128 terrain is? See the hard lines where it cuts into the 4096x4096 terrain? Mathematically, there is 1024 times the geometric detail in the big terrain. If that's not a big enough detail magnifier for ya, then go back to tiling your terrains a la' Bryce 3D...

And, one last shot : A closer-up, side-by-side comparison. In this one, I have hidden either-or terrain and composited the renders. This is at a nearly normal camera angle, the other camera angle was very high up to get a wider view... Is there not hidden worlds in this difference...? Seems like I could zoom in all day on the large terrain, and find more details... Shall I zoom in further....? (and YES, I am not sane, my friend!)

LSD, You are still showing me differences between 128 and 512, but sorry, I cannot buy that. Respectfully, you are totally wrong from what I can see here. Create a terrain, then go into terrain editor and increase its resolution to the highest amount 4096x4096 (planetary resolution). Yes, it will take some time. Now click new. All is wiped clean and we go from the start at 4096x4096. Go down the fractal type and select one. Any one! Then click the fractal type button. That new fractal, whatever it is, is created in a master size not seen by the user because its random. And the only portion that will be seen by the user will be that arbitrary portion slice, no other, although much more exists! The user has no idea what is to the left, right, top, or bottom of this tile geographically being produced at 4096x4096 geographically speaking. This user can continue going north on this scale and every time see what is north of his last terrain and still not know what the next tile will hold in complexity. Are you suggesting that you can provide more complexity than this feature? Then, you will have to show us.

My next question which I didnt put into the last post is: can you see what that geography extended is and can you have it come on your Bryce display before we tile? If youre asking me, can we make a more complex geographical texture, I will say yes, because I know how to. But thats a different question.

Message edited on: 04/12/2005 03:10

Quest, re-read your last line in #30. I'm saying that it's the SAME complexity, and that at 4096 you are viewing a vaster slice of it in the Terrain Editor, with no need for tiling. A 4096 texture IS as complex as 64 512 x 512 textures, in fact exactly as complex. Without the time-intensive process of making 64 of the smaller terrains and arranging them. If you wanted to tile 4096x4096 textures, though, then I can see where you're coming from. Still, you're looking at a very finite amount of them : 33 Million polys at render-time is no joke. There's not enough RAM in the world to remap the Earth itself in this fashion, for example... Now we're getting on into Mojo-land, though... (grins) So as long as you guys aren't multi-tiling huge textures for some massive project, then I can't see any point to tiling at all... Make any sense now? (you made sense to me, anyway!)

I'm too lazy to do a fancy graphic this morning, but I think you two are discussing two different points. A fractal terrain is defined by a mathematical formula. When you generate one, Bryce gives you a chunk out of that formula. Random extent gives you the value range for x and y, or the size of the chunk. Random position determins the starting values of x and y, or where in the formula to get the chunk from. Random character is kinda like the noise or octaves in the fractal. Increasing the resolution will give you more detail covering the same chunk. Tiling will give you the next chunk of the same fractal, at the same detail level. For more detail, increase the resolution. For a larger area when you found a terrain you like, tile.

Wow! It's along time since I've seen such an in-depth discussion. WTG guys!!!! This what the forum is all about. Now, having read most of the above I suddenly thought of something that could have a bearing on all of this. Some DEM files come in 3 parts. i.e.: 3 parts makes up one DEM region. The problem I had was with making them match up to create the complete region. Nothing seemed to work. Reading all this stuff from you guys gives me the idea that by tiling East, South, West or similar I may actually succeed. I'm not about to try this out yet, but I will when I get more time....that is....unless one of you guys wants to try it out for me.....!

Available on Amazon for the Kindle E-Reader

All the Woes of a World by Jonathan Icknield aka The Bryster

And in my final hours - I would cling rather to the tattooed hand of kindness - than the unblemished hand of hate...

So what's the deal? Does higher resolution simply give you greater detail of a small chunk or does it give you the same resolution but a bigger chunk. It seems to me LSD is arguing the latter, whereas Quest and xenic are arguing the former. I did a test of my own to answer the question.


<strong>bandolin</strong><br />
[Former 3DS Max forum coordinator]<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php">Homepage</a> ||
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/sitemail/">SiteMail</a> ||
<a href="http://excalibur.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?user_id=70375">
Gallery</a> || <a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/index.php?username=bandolin">
Freestuff</a>
<p><em>Caution: just a hobbyist</em></p>

Here are two identical terrains but at different resolutions. As you can see the higher resolution terrain is the SAME chunk, but with greater detail.


<strong>bandolin</strong><br />
[Former 3DS Max forum coordinator]<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php">Homepage</a> ||
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/sitemail/">SiteMail</a> ||
<a href="http://excalibur.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?user_id=70375">
Gallery</a> || <a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/index.php?username=bandolin">
Freestuff</a>
<p><em>Caution: just a hobbyist</em></p>

But what I believe what Quest is trying to explain; there is more to this chunk that we're not seeing.


<strong>bandolin</strong><br />
[Former 3DS Max forum coordinator]<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php">Homepage</a> ||
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/sitemail/">SiteMail</a> ||
<a href="http://excalibur.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?user_id=70375">
Gallery</a> || <a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/index.php?username=bandolin">
Freestuff</a>
<p><em>Caution: just a hobbyist</em></p>

The only way to see beyond this valley is to tile, as demonstrated in the pic above. So, I believe LSD and Quest (like xenic points out) are arguing about two different things. Both you guys have the right story, but you're reading from two different books. Am I right? Or am I just full of hot air?


<strong>bandolin</strong><br />
[Former 3DS Max forum coordinator]<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php">Homepage</a> ||
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/sitemail/">SiteMail</a> ||
<a href="http://excalibur.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?user_id=70375">
Gallery</a> || <a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/index.php?username=bandolin">
Freestuff</a>
<p><em>Caution: just a hobbyist</em></p>

You are totally right! Wow, posts this active are usually about the Hot 20 or something sensitive like that. If only you got into heated arguments like this on every question. We would learn so much about how to do something.

will that second terrain tile ok if you put it on the left and flip it either x or z ??

"Reinstall Windows" is NOT a troubleshooting step.

No that's not the way tiling works in Bryce. See Quest's post #13.


<strong>bandolin</strong><br />
[Former 3DS Max forum coordinator]<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php">Homepage</a> ||
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/sitemail/">SiteMail</a> ||
<a href="http://excalibur.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?user_id=70375">
Gallery</a> || <a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/index.php?username=bandolin">
Freestuff</a>
<p><em>Caution: just a hobbyist</em></p>

Perhaps we are arguing 2 different arguments LSD and Im sorry if in fact that is the case. Excellent comparison Bryster, with the Dem analogy. Maybe this will help make my point clear. Lets assume for the sake of argument that we have the Bryce option to tile the world at different resolutions. Lets tile Western Europe starting with Portugal. We go into fractal type and click Europe and the fractal slice that comes up is Portugal at 128 resolution. But we find that this resolution isnt quite good enough for us, it appears too smooth with little geographic convolutions. So we up the resolution to 512. We get the same tile, Portugal, but with more geographic detail and this makes us happy. But now we want to cover more ground at the same resolution of 512 to add variety to our landscape thus offering other vantage points for our camera. We ask Bryce to tile east and this all of a sudden, takes us into Spain. We still can see Portugal from Spain at a resolution of 512. Wanting larger landscapes with more variety we continue to extend our tiles going north and we enter France. We can now see the landscape of Portugal, Spain and France and all the varied topography that goes along with them. Point is, were no longer just stuck in Portugal and Portugals geography at 512 or any other resolution but we also have Spain and Frances landscape at our disposal to look at from any angled vantage point we desire and manipulate the resolutions of those vistas. That is what Bryce tiling does for us. It expands our fractal vistas instead of just being stuck visually on one slice. Maybe the Pyrenees mountain range looks better from the French side as opposed to the Spanish side. Now we can rotate our camera around it and see which angle is more esthetically pleasing to capture.

Why not make the close area the high res. and then tile more distant parts of the landscape at lower resolutions? That way you cover the amount of landscape needed for a scene, but keep the detail only where it's necessary. There's a reason that tiling was kept, even though the resolutions have become more massive. Just something to think about while on the topic.

Barbequed Pixels?

Your friendly neighborhood Wings3D nut.
Also feel free to browse my freebies at ShareCG.
There might be something worth downloading.

Aye, Pauljs, now THAT's a very good point! ANd yeah, I think me and Quest were just not understanding each other's POV's. Maybe our DOF settings were different, or perhaps he was running DDR RAM and I was using only the CPU? (grins)

I think this feature would be very useful if you could just tell the program that you would like a 9 tiled terrain, and whatever multiple of that, and have them all pop up in your workspace, perfectly positioned in relation to each other, with no visible seams. As it is, even playing around with two that are supposed to fit, I still see the seam. Maybe in a future version?

This is not my "second childhood". I'm not finished with the first one yet.

Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana.

"I'd like to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather....not screaming in terror like the passengers on his bus." - Jack Handy

Thank you bandolin, for the excellent pictures that demonstrate the point. And to quest for the words I couldn't find this morning. And to pauljs for the brilliant observation. And to lordstormdragon for the DOF analogy. I really should wake up earlier if I'm going to browse the forum before work.

Now I want to go make some huge terrains. Thanks people :)

Come visit us at RenderGods.

Ignore the shooty dog thing.

Absolutely, Bandolin, great illustration of the discussion in progress. The more I think about it, the more I believe that LSD is talking about detail and Im talking about adding more terrain imagery. After all, that is what tiling does for Bryce. Not only can you add more terrain imagery (eye candy) but also control its resolution from 16 - 4096 for every tile if that is what you crave. And Pauljs is correct, you can alter the individual tiles resolution so as to put the higher resolution ones close to the viewer and the lesser resolution ones further away.

As an additional note... LSD does have a point concerning the single terrain argument. Using Photoshop, and the clouds filter I created a terrain 2048x2048. I imported it into Bryce's terrain editor and set the resolution the same. I then scaled up the terrain until it was huge (4000x, 1000y, 4000z). By doing so, I endeavoured to created a terrain that is equally as complex as a multi-tiled Bryce terrain. Now the advantage being, I now wish to create a river through the landscape. This is much easier to achieve with a single terrain. Even Quest, must agree with this. Now I must admit, this technique works fine for rolling hills (similar to the English countryside). However, other terrain types may be a little trickier. But any way you look at it. I'm loving Bryce more and more as I learn about its many features, and I'd like to personally thank everyone who has contributed to this thread. Its the most fun I've had yet in this forum. Now if I could just get that pesky mat to be seamless...


<strong>bandolin</strong><br />
[Former 3DS Max forum coordinator]<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php">Homepage</a> ||
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/sitemail/">SiteMail</a> ||
<a href="http://excalibur.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?user_id=70375">
Gallery</a> || <a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/index.php?username=bandolin">
Freestuff</a>
<p><em>Caution: just a hobbyist</em></p>

Not to be insulitng, but if you (anyone) thinks that Bryce's fractal generators in the Terrain Editor are advanced or powerful, you're just plain wrong. They serve merely a preview purpose, although many people stick to them exclusively, which is one of the reasons many Bryce terrains look the same, or similar. Aye, I don't mean to come across as being so cocky or obnoxious, I guess it just goes with the screen name? Xenic, I agree! I love threads like this, although I am frustrated with people not being able to grasp simple mathematical concepts. You stated that the technique works fine for rolling hills and whatnot, but that's just the tip of the iceberg! Honestly, Xenic, your image-map in that post doesn't do height-mapping much justice... A fractal is a fractal. It's what you do with it that gives it detail. The only limit here is displacement, since we're using height-mapping instead of vertex mapping... Here's a fractal I generated in Kai's Power Tools 5 : Noize, an excellent and elegantly simple fractal filter for Photoshop and for Bryce. The original is at 2048x2048, this one is shrunken for web display...

And as you can see, there is nothing "rolling" about these hills. I took the fractal image above, imported into the Terrain Editor at 2048x2048, and inverted it. Then just added some procedurals slope-mapped with the original fire fractal, and threw in a light. The orange, firey parts of the fractal now create chasms and canyons. And as you can see, there is a massive level of detail in the geometry here. And this is just a quicky, the simplest fractal I could make in KPT5: Noize.

Someone's dropped a glob of jelly on your fractal. Top center formation, looks like a yelling face. This looks like the kind of thing you see at Yellowstone National Park, those little rock things in shallow water. Add some real clear water to the whole thing, then put some deep blue and or green water to the hollows.

And a more realistic render, with a water plane and some trees to show how high up in the air the camera is... Quest, I really like your display, though! Good stuff, all the way around...!

Bandolin, that is one of the great things about Bryce. You can use not only the cloud filter in Photoshop but you can export an entire Bryce tiled height map, work on it in other image editing programs, create your river right onto the height map, then re-import it back into Bryce and continue working on it. You can even create different standard terrains in Bryce with totally different features on it export them all out as height maps and in any editing program, weave them together to create an entirely different landscape. Importing images into Bryce to create images isnt anything new to Bryce, if you have Susan Kitchens book (the Bryce bible) you can read about this Bryce feature starting on page 675 Altitude Render. But the original topic to this thread before it veered off into different directions was about Bryce tiling and thus yet again we veer off into importing and exporting height maps. Two totally different topics. You cannot compare height map generation with mathematical algorithmic generation. The fractals that Bryce puts out as natural geographical geometry come from algorithms developed and exclusively engineered for that purpose, to make them look like mountains and natural landscapes. The scientific works of Ken Mustgrave who worked with Benoit Mandelbrot (of Mandelbrot fractal fame) at Yale university and Ken Parlin (now Parlin Hills in the fractal type generator) were married together by software engineer, musician, artist Eric Wenger (the son of a geologist) into a software package for his personal pursuit, which we now call Bryce. You can read more about the history of Bryce starting with chapter 1, page 1 of Susan Kitchens book. Bryce can bring any outside image into its interface and treat them as height maps, including other fractal images. You can even handwrite your name and bring that into Bryce. But that doesnt mean that those images will look as natural as the fractals engineered to serve that purpose by the original creator of the program. Not all fractals are engineered to look like natural. For instance, although the accompanying fractal may render interesting in Bryce, it is far from anything geological. That feature to import outside images from what I understand, wasnt developed until later when it became public and not inherent in the original software. What would be really nice is if new algorithms were further developed to enhance the Bryce experience.

Bandolin, here Ive tiled at 512, altitude rendered and saved the image out at 1024. Brought it into Photoshop and edited my meandering river in, cropped unwanted portions out and imported into Bryce again at 512, textured, added water and river bed bottom and rendered to screen. P.S. You can also draw your river in with the terrain editor on one terrain chunk.

Message edited on: 04/13/2005 23:28

Aye, but re-importing it again into Bryce at 512 kills 75% of your poly resolution, Quest. Re-import the original 1024 Photoshop-edit at 1024 in Bryce, and you will retain your tiling data!

Aha! Best of both worlds... One thign I wondered, Bandolin, on your post in #49 (or 39?), did you adjust the image source resolution AFTER you imported your image? You need to do that before, in case you didn't... I don't think it will auto-reload the image source file... (just in case!)

Message edited on: 04/14/2005 01:10

Aye LSD, that totally depends on how you intend to use the final output. If it were to be viewed under close scrutiny then you should go all out to retain detail integrity otherwise, its a waste. I didnt think it needed to be mentioned because I thought it went without saying, but you can also output your altitude render from Bryce at higher resolutions as well if that kind of detail is necessary for your work.

Just a side note folks, don't forget there is also an easter egg to get DTE into the TE, for all sorts of wonderful creations.

----------

Toolset: Blender, GIMP, Indigo Render, LuxRender, TopMod, Knotplot, Ivy Gen, Plant Studio.

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=1587818

LOLGod, yet another topic!

The terrain was created in PS 2048 px by 2048 px @ 72 dpi. Imported into Bryce TE whereby the rez was already set at 2048. Is that what you mean?


<strong>bandolin</strong><br />
[Former 3DS Max forum coordinator]<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/homepage.php">Homepage</a> ||
<a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/sitemail/">SiteMail</a> ||
<a href="http://excalibur.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/browse.php?user_id=70375">
Gallery</a> || <a href="http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/index.php?username=bandolin">
Freestuff</a>
<p><em>Caution: just a hobbyist</em></p>

What I meant was, initial Bryce resolution in the Terrain Editor is 128 ( I believe). Importing a picture doesn't change the source resolution automatically, you have to do it manually before importing the image file... Hopefully I'm not confusing you, but Bryce doesn't auto-adjust the import resolution, it just re-interpolates the image at 128 unless you tell it otherwise...

Forum: Bryce

Subject: Tiled terrains - what am I doing wrong?