CompuServe Thread

#bitmap shadows?

14 messages in this thread
#154811From: Joe MillerFeb 21, 1995 9:23 PM
Phil, Ya gotta help me. I'm doing something I thought would be a snap and it's turning out to be an impossibility. On the first page of "Colorplate Samples" in the r3 Reference Manual (right after page 8-152), image 8 shows opacity mapping. What I see there is a bitmap image (concen.tga) projected onto the solid geometry of an umbrella, with a shadow-casting spotlight shining on the geometry. The way the bitmap image drapes over the geometry determines the appearance of the shadow, not the geometry itself. I'm trying to do something that I think is very similar if not identical. I'm trying to show trees on a site plan by mapping .TGA images of trees onto rectangles and using ray-tracing spotlights to cast shadows of the trees, not the rectangles. It's not working. I can remove the shadow of the rectangle OK, and the image of the tree shows up OK, but I can't get the image of the tree to cast a shadow. The only shadow I can get is of the rectangle. Yes, my light is ray-traced. I've tried about a hundred possible combinations, but not the right one. I'm e-mailing you the very small .PRJ file I used for testing. When I started trying to do this, I was using a 24-bit .TGA scanned tree and a 1-bit .TIF conversion of the same tree as an opacity map. I replaced the tree .TGA and .TIF w/ CONCEN.TGA off the WCT CD-ROM, so I'm not sending that. I'll buy your R4 book if you can solve this <bg>. I've got the R3 edition, but can't find the answer there. Thanks very much for all your recent help. Joe Miller
#154885From: James SpierFeb 22, 1995 8:02 AM
Joe, PMJI. You need another projector spotlight to project a shadow image of the trees on the wall with all other objects excluded from it to simulate shadows. ME
#154936From: Joe MillerFeb 22, 1995 11:34 AM
Thanks Max, So it's all done w/ smoke & mirrors, eh? <g> I guess in a way it may work better this way. Am I correct in thinking that the rendering time for 20-30 trees on a site would be less this way than if 3DS were actually able to project the shadows through the bitmaps while rendering the rest of the scene? Thanks for the help. Joe
#154957From: Marty FeldhausFeb 22, 1995 1:56 PM
PMJI Joe, but I think in order for your trees to cast "tree" shadows, you may need to use a 1 bit opacity map along with the tree texture map. The opacity map will cast the shadow, not the "tree" or the rectangle. I beleive Phil's book for ver 3 mentions this on pages 326-327-328?. Hope this helps til Phil gets back to you. Marty Feldhaus
#155230From: Joe MillerFeb 23, 1995 1:12 PM
Thanks Marty >> to cast "tree" shadows, you may need to use a 1 bit opacity map I already had the opacity map. You know what the problem was? I wasn't looking through a camera viewport!! I didn't know that the shadows only appear when looking through a camera viewport. I set up a camera viewport the next morning to check something else and thought I was having some sort of seizure: There were the shadows I had been busting my butt trying to get the night before. Then I went back to the TOP viewport to look at them and they weren't there. Even though I would have eventually rendered my scenes through a camera viewport, it was very disturbing not to see the shadows in the non-camera viewport. I don't know where the camera limitation on bit-mapped shadows appears in any documentation, but it sure doesn't appear where it is needed!!
#155284From: David RhotenFeb 23, 1995 4:46 PM
This is disturbing! Jonaaaaaaas!!!! I wish for Shadows in non-camera viewports! The reason is, I've been contemplating rendering some TOP views of sites w/ shadows for presentations. Generally, when an architect/landscape architect colors up a site plan for presentation, he/she draws cast shadows on it — and I was hoping to replicate this. I imagine I COULD put a camera very far away and do a Render/Blowup to try to approximate an axonometric image (as opposed to the intense three-point perspective that a normal aerial camera would produce, but….
#155308From: Joe MillerFeb 23, 1995 6:34 PM
Dave, You realize that I'm only talking about bit-mapped shadows like shadows through a bit-mapped tree, not *all* shadows. But if you're doing landscape architecture, then maybe you're in trouble. Joe
#155463From: David RhotenFeb 24, 1995 10:49 AM
Hmm, I guess I jumped to conclusions a bit, as obviously, you WERE only talking about the lack of opacity-mapped shadows, and this, as you say, would generally not be a problem. I was probably overdue for my hourly Coca-Cola fix! <G> Sorry for freaking out! Dave
#155356From: Jonas Ruikis [ADESK]Feb 23, 1995 10:29 PM
<<.. wish?..>> got it.
#155380From: ROBERT RITGERFeb 24, 1995 12:17 AM
Dave: It seems that doing straight overhead siteplan views which animate to fly arounds are what I can expect as a standard request from my office. I usually use camera viewports so the no shadows in the top viewport problem is one I haven't heard of or experienced. However, the quaternion forced role is another animal in need of taming. I wish I could lock the roll on a camera even when near the quaternion black hole. The suggestions to rotate the whole scene have never worked for me as the fly around then gets the troubling roll. Sure, you could move the world around and leave the camera still but this just isn't intuitive for me. And while I'm at it, I got one principal in our firm who seriously wants me to dump 3DS as it can't do 2 point perspectives and he laughed at the render blow-up fudge. Seems like a common complaint as when I worked for Philip Johnson he hated the 3 point perspective views of the Times Square project which would show the buildings leaning in if you happen to raise your eye point above your target point. The render blowup is not an option in tall interior spaces either even if you hide walls. OK, I feel better now. <G>
#155428From: Jonas Ruikis [ADESK]Feb 24, 1995 9:07 AM
<< I wish I could lock the roll on a camera even when near the quaternion black hole. >> got it.
#155464From: David RhotenFeb 24, 1995 10:49 AM
You should'a just told "Phil" that it was his big-ol' glasses that were causing the distortion!<G> While you tend to have the same problems (of trying to capture high/wide spaces) with normal (non-perspective-correcting) cameras, it _would_ be nice to have more (easy to use) architecturally-oriented image tools. Back to Phil, it amazes me that so many architects (my own firm included) are ready to dismiss something as useful as 3d-modeling/rendering/anim'ing based on one single item that doesn't meet their expectation(s). "Oh, well, if it won't do THAT, then what's the point?"
#155818From: ROBERT RITGERFeb 26, 1995 11:27 PM
Dave: /_______________________From your message________________________\\ "Oh, well, if it won't do THAT, then what's the point?" __________________________________________________________________ Yeah, that's the sentiment I run into and it takes a bit of the wind out of one's sails when encountered. Bob
#155499From: Marty FeldhausFeb 24, 1995 12:57 PM
Joe – Your welcome, and glad you were able to get it to work. Now that you mention it the camera viewport does ring a bell. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, a spotlight VPort will also render shadows? I'm not able to check now, but try it. Marty