Hm... I like the texture a lot more than the rounded globs one but it seems a little dark. But then I suppose they would be dark, being in caves and such. Overall very nice.
Too dark is relatively easy to remedy. For myself, however - now that I look at it again this morning its too smooth. This is a slightly bigger problem since the poly count (that's like the number of nodes in a 2D polygon in CC3) is approaching maximum for my tiny machine at well over 1 million, so details are going to have to be effected through better texturing and 'normal displacement' (that's where the shade of the texture appears to bend the mesh of the model) to make it more knobbly. That particular exercise may take a while, since it may also involve something called 'UV unrwapping', where the polygons that describe the surface are literally unwrapped from the model and laid flat on a 2D texture image...
Who would have thought a model of a stalagmite would prove to be such an interesting project?!
Really like the shape but now it seems too white. Can you keep the shape and just add color? Something reddish-brown, maybe? I'm really not that familiar with how these actually look... I'm going to have to go do a little research just for my own curiosity now.
And right, you are, Quenten. From the pictures I found, stalagmites appear to be mostly greyish-white and yellowy. I was expecting brilliant colors for some reason, but they look like giant calcium deposits.
Via Wikipedia "The most common stalagmites are speleothems, which usually form in limestone caves.[5] This stalagmite formation occurs only under certain pH conditions within the underground cavern. They form through deposition of calcium carbonate and other minerals, which is precipitated from mineralized water solutions. Limestone is the chief form of calcium carbonate rock, which is dissolved by water that contains carbon dioxide, forming a calcium bicarbonate solution in underground caverns.[6]
If stalactites – the ceiling formations – grow long enough to connect with stalagmites on the floor, they form a column.
Stalagmites should normally not be touched, since the rock buildup is formed by minerals precipitating out of the water solution onto the existing surface; skin oils can alter the surface tension where the mineral water clings or flows, thus affecting the growth of the formation. Oils and dirt from human contact can also stain the formation and change its color permanently."
I still need a top view shot. The nearest caves to me are 3 hours drive away, and I just don't have the money for that kind of trip right now.
I also remember that Wookey Hole is very... 'touristy', in the sense that all the visitors are kept at least 50 yards away from things like pristine stalagmites.
I think, on the theme of colour, white is the dominant thing, but I also vaguely remember from the tour guide that impurities like iron can cause yellowish or reddish stains, and that where stalagmites grow quickly they may have rings where greater rainfall causes more leaching through the parent rock.
I think I started doing that because I initially intended to include a transparent shadow with the symbol. Wall shadow and drop shadow effects won't work very well on them because the base of the stalagmite is faded out to blend it with the underlying texture.
I can see what you mean, though, and I'll have a think about it.
Maybe I will do that (once I can work out how to translate a Blender model to Wilbur, where I can get an automatic map file), and include separate shadow symbols to match the stalagmites - ones that you can paste in before adding the stalagmite.
I toured that a couple years ago. Impressive. I remember that even though an the small/micro level the formations are very smooth, they are jumbles of lots of smooth things. So in once sense they are rough, but in another smooth. See what I mean from looking at some of the Google pictures.
Note that the lights inside are fairly orange in color, which changes the apparent color of the formations.
I enjoyed watching the video, and I can see what you mean about the orange lighting, but also, the limestone in that relatively arid region seems to be fairly reddish anyway. There must be a lot of iron in those hills. No surprise - iron deposits are commonly found in close association with limestone, though only rarely is there enough iron for it to be worth commercial extraction.
I still didn't find any top down photos, but knowing they aren't really all that rough is a great help. You see - I'm relying on memories that are over 40 years old.
I really should go and have another look in real life
Yep, disadvantage of stalagmites is they come as a pair with a stalactite directly above, which makes overhead imaging difficult!
You may have better luck trying for images of model stalagmites, Sue, as several gaming manufacturers make model cavern pieces which are based on reality, but designed for gaming, so you often find just the lower part is available. And folks do like imaging their cavern set-ups from above! Try a search using "Dwarven Forge cavern images" or "Dwarven Forge stalagmite images" (DF being one of the Big Names in realistic cast model gaming scenery).
Remy already commented on the "fixed shadow" problem, so hope you can make progress with that aspect too.
I wasn't going to do any stalactites because that's part of the roof, and no one does the roof in top view battle maps... but I can see it would be difficult to photo stalagmites if the gap was a bit small :P
Thanks for the search tip. I'll have a look and see what I can find.
The map files I've managed to generate by exporting a height map from Blender to Wilbur and getting Wilbur to shade the height map like a CD3 roof don't really do the job. That's the problem I'm working on right now. In order for the thing to look even half way right the angle of the global sun has to be just 20 degrees. That's nearly sunset compared to the normal 60 degree default setting. I'm not sure why this is happening. I've checked the actual map file, and the blue (usually roof pitch) is at about 130, which is damn near vertical, but it doesn't look all that different to the same stalagmite without the map file.
Please ignore the fact that these bronzed stalagmites are again completely the wrong colour. The top 5 have map files, while the bottom three have no map file. Personally I prefer the non map file version, even though they have no shadow and look flat compared to the crystal next to them, which has a very pale drop shadow on it.
The MAP group of five "zing" for me - they look "real" and upstanding - whereas I'm having my common problem with the flat triplet - are these flat, do they sink down in the centre, or rise up? I can't really be sure.
Well I could do both sets I suppose - one with map files and one without.
The other thing I'm having trouble with is the way the map file is affecting the transparent edges of the symbol where it fades out to merge with whatever background texture the stalagmite is sitting on. It has to fade out, or we're back to piles of dino dung :P
If you look at the map file version the transparent edge is no longer fading out properly. Not sure what to do to stop the map file affecting the transparent part like that...
The entire map file symbol set will have to come with some kind of warning notice - these stalagmites look best with a setting of 20 degrees for the global sun.
The other reason I was going to do shadowed versions is that it would have been possible to rotate the symbols around a central light source so that the shadow sides always faced away from the light. Shaded symbols (those with map files) only react to the global sun, and not to DD3 lighting effects. I noticed that when I did Bloodrock - the map of a tiny village on a mesa down a drain.
Comments
Well that is exactly what I thought the moment I hid the dark texture and looked at them on the paler one - complete with poisonous beans! Hehehe!
But I still thought I'd share the joke
The soil fill could still do with a few tweaks, but I'm heavily into stalagmites right now. I'm also happier with the more natural colours
Thoughts?
[Image_10581]
Too dark is relatively easy to remedy. For myself, however - now that I look at it again this morning its too smooth. This is a slightly bigger problem since the poly count (that's like the number of nodes in a 2D polygon in CC3) is approaching maximum for my tiny machine at well over 1 million, so details are going to have to be effected through better texturing and 'normal displacement' (that's where the shade of the texture appears to bend the mesh of the model) to make it more knobbly. That particular exercise may take a while, since it may also involve something called 'UV unrwapping', where the polygons that describe the surface are literally unwrapped from the model and laid flat on a 2D texture image...
Who would have thought a model of a stalagmite would prove to be such an interesting project?!
Has anyone got any photos of stalagmites taken from above? All I can find on Google is side shots.
If stalactites – the ceiling formations – grow long enough to connect with stalagmites on the floor, they form a column.
Stalagmites should normally not be touched, since the rock buildup is formed by minerals precipitating out of the water solution onto the existing surface; skin oils can alter the surface tension where the mineral water clings or flows, thus affecting the growth of the formation. Oils and dirt from human contact can also stain the formation and change its color permanently."
This is better than Google :P
I still need a top view shot. The nearest caves to me are 3 hours drive away, and I just don't have the money for that kind of trip right now.
I also remember that Wookey Hole is very... 'touristy', in the sense that all the visitors are kept at least 50 yards away from things like pristine stalagmites.
I think, on the theme of colour, white is the dominant thing, but I also vaguely remember from the tour guide that impurities like iron can cause yellowish or reddish stains, and that where stalagmites grow quickly they may have rings where greater rainfall causes more leaching through the parent rock.
I can see what you mean, though, and I'll have a think about it.
Maybe I will do that (once I can work out how to translate a Blender model to Wilbur, where I can get an automatic map file), and include separate shadow symbols to match the stalagmites - ones that you can paste in before adding the stalagmite.
Thank you JMunson
I toured that a couple years ago. Impressive. I remember that even though an the small/micro level the formations are very smooth, they are jumbles of lots of smooth things. So in once sense they are rough, but in another smooth. See what I mean from looking at some of the Google pictures.
Note that the lights inside are fairly orange in color, which changes the apparent color of the formations.
I enjoyed watching the video, and I can see what you mean about the orange lighting, but also, the limestone in that relatively arid region seems to be fairly reddish anyway. There must be a lot of iron in those hills. No surprise - iron deposits are commonly found in close association with limestone, though only rarely is there enough iron for it to be worth commercial extraction.
I still didn't find any top down photos, but knowing they aren't really all that rough is a great help. You see - I'm relying on memories that are over 40 years old.
I really should go and have another look in real life
You may have better luck trying for images of model stalagmites, Sue, as several gaming manufacturers make model cavern pieces which are based on reality, but designed for gaming, so you often find just the lower part is available. And folks do like imaging their cavern set-ups from above! Try a search using "Dwarven Forge cavern images" or "Dwarven Forge stalagmite images" (DF being one of the Big Names in realistic cast model gaming scenery).
Remy already commented on the "fixed shadow" problem, so hope you can make progress with that aspect too.
Thanks for the search tip. I'll have a look and see what I can find.
The map files I've managed to generate by exporting a height map from Blender to Wilbur and getting Wilbur to shade the height map like a CD3 roof don't really do the job. That's the problem I'm working on right now. In order for the thing to look even half way right the angle of the global sun has to be just 20 degrees. That's nearly sunset compared to the normal 60 degree default setting. I'm not sure why this is happening. I've checked the actual map file, and the blue (usually roof pitch) is at about 130, which is damn near vertical, but it doesn't look all that different to the same stalagmite without the map file.
Please ignore the fact that these bronzed stalagmites are again completely the wrong colour. The top 5 have map files, while the bottom three have no map file. Personally I prefer the non map file version, even though they have no shadow and look flat compared to the crystal next to them, which has a very pale drop shadow on it.
The other thing I'm having trouble with is the way the map file is affecting the transparent edges of the symbol where it fades out to merge with whatever background texture the stalagmite is sitting on. It has to fade out, or we're back to piles of dino dung :P
If you look at the map file version the transparent edge is no longer fading out properly. Not sure what to do to stop the map file affecting the transparent part like that...
The entire map file symbol set will have to come with some kind of warning notice - these stalagmites look best with a setting of 20 degrees for the global sun.
The other reason I was going to do shadowed versions is that it would have been possible to rotate the symbols around a central light source so that the shadow sides always faced away from the light. Shaded symbols (those with map files) only react to the global sun, and not to DD3 lighting effects. I noticed that when I did Bloodrock - the map of a tiny village on a mesa down a drain.
No matter. I'm working on it