Spring Tool

[Criss]

Please allow the option to dig very deep and possibly more wide channels.

See Here: lower center, lower right.

http://earth.imagico.de/views/anden6_large.jpg



Idea!
Possible with a variation of the Spring Tool?

See Here:

http://earth.imagico.de/views/jemen_new2_large.jpg

The difference here is the channel ends are very wide open and it is on flat land with a more abstract flow pattern (not so curvy). It looks like a huge fern laying down on the terrain.

[monks]

Hormann produces some amazing results!

You can get these effects with the isolines but a semi automatic way of generating them would be a time saver.

monks

[Criss]

I think i'd ware out my tablet trying to draw all of that with isolines, he heh.

[cajomi]

Best, you wait until the next build is up, and see, what the river and lake tool can do.

In general, this tool is very complex to code, and for example a good "wide" value is not possible. The tool reacts to the terrain: So, if there is a flat part, the river will be wider, and if there is a rough part, the rivers will be small.

Also, the examples you have linked to, do not show water, but erosion. River and lake will be able to show the water, where a river or lake is. That was the challenge: To bring water into the terrains, and not only the erosion water can cause. But this also limits the possibilities.
Another point: If you look at the first image, you can see different erosions, caused by different materials. What I am wondering:
I have studied thousand of photos, but nether saw such a combination of erosions. But is looks stunning. A simulation of such a landscape would need different eroions to different parts of the terrain. But I think, without a bit help of the isolines, it will not be possible. Do not forget, to manage such differnt eroions with only erosion settings, would be much more work and more time to spend, then simply dig the bigger cuts, and then erode them.

[Criss]

Best, you wait until the next build is up, and see, what the river and lake tool can do.

Looking forward to that. I am going to try and get the masking of the rivers to work in Terragen 2 if i know what i am doing that is. It's still a hard program to tackle for now. I am assuming there will be a river mask extraction method for the spring tool for the next build, right?



In general, this tool is very complex to code, and for example a good "wide" value is not possible. The tool reacts to the terrain: So, if there is a flat part, the river will be wider, and if there is a rough part, the rivers will be small.

Right, that makes sense with the spring tool.



Also, the examples you have linked to, do not show water, but erosion. River and lake will be able to show the water, where a river or lake is. That was the challenge: To bring water into the terrains, and not only the erosion water can cause. But this also limits the possibilities.
Another point: If you look at the first image, you can see different erosions, caused by different materials. What I am wondering:
I have studied thousand of photos, but nether saw such a combination of erosions. But is looks stunning. A simulation of such a landscape would need different eroions to different parts of the terrain. But I think, without a bit help of the isolines, it will not be possible. Do not forget, to manage such differnt eroions with only erosion settings, would be much more work and more time to spend, then simply dig the bigger cuts, and then erode them.


Right i knew that was all erosion, i was just thinking about alternative possibilities with the spring tool but i guess the next best thing to try is using a combination of Thin Flows Deep with the Wide Flows along with using the isolines with the combo of different erosions like you had suggested.

[cajomi]

Well, the developement of TG2 is a desaster for me.

The new spring tool is a good example:
TG2 has no transparance for water so far, so the second water body terrain will make no sense. Working with masks is not possible so far, because all masking is mixed with a fractal pattern, no chance to get clear flows or to mask the rivers to add highlights or transparancy. Of course TG 0.9 does also not work, because of missing shading for reflection and highlights.

Vue is not exact enough for the water body terrain. Even masking the rivers will not work good, because the masks do not fit exactly to the terrains. I hope they will fix that.

So far I can see, only Bryce and Carrara will be able, to get the full power out of it. And both with limitations.

Bryce has no good transparency for a natural river, but better than nothing.
Only Carrara has all what is needed, with a plugin.

If I would get a second coder in my team, I think, I would try to develope GC to standalone, with complete photorealistic rendering.

[Criss]

Well, the developement of TG2 is a desaster for me.

The new spring tool is a good example:
TG2 has no transparance for water so far, so the second water body terrain will make no sense. Working with masks is not possible so far, because all masking is mixed with a fractal pattern, no chance to get clear flows or to mask the rivers to add highlights or transparancy. Of course TG 0.9 does also not work, because of missing shading for reflection and highlights.

I visit the Planetside forums every now and then so i know what that is all about, very unfortunate situation there. I managed the line up the texture map overlay correctly with the corresponding terrain but even still it does not look as good as what i was doing in Terragen 0.9 using SO Pack. I think i may have to abandon TG2 for awhile but i am not too certain of that just yet.



Vue is not exact enough for the water body terrain. Even masking the rivers will not work good, because the masks do not fit exactly to the terrains. I hope they will fix that.

So far I can see, only Bryce and Carrara will be able, to get the full power out of it. And both with limitations.

Bryce has no good transparency for a natural river, but better than nothing.
Only Carrara has all what is needed, with a plugin.

I agree that Carrara has the best outcome so far but if it was not for the lack of fractal details in the terrains and poor skies i would stick with Carrara more often.



If I would get a second coder in my team, I think, I would try to develope GC to standalone, with complete photorealistic rendering.

Are you suggesting a complete terrain rendering system with editable atmospheres and other accompanying features?

[cajomi]

Yes, I mean that, what I expected from TG2. The mulit planet idea is so far from what is needed.
At time were are able to create a local part of a landscape and render it. But we are not able to produce convincing continents. That would be the next logical step. Not earth, not planet, of course no multi planets, but a continent, with many different landscape types.
But that is to much for work for one person.

[Criss]

Since you had mention problems with the masking in TG2 i had come across this board that talks about masking rivers and lakes with existing terrain in TG2. This might be of some interest perhaps.

http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=1164.0

[cajomi]

I am waiting for the next update. I have just tried to work with TG2, but after 3 shut downs, well........

[Criss]

Ahh, i understand.