Preserved Topic: Seamless tiling tutorial

I was link-hopping and came across this. Uses a bit more than Offset.
http://www.3drender.com/light/EqTutorial/tiling.htm

Good link WJ. I was trying to do the image correction thingy he does, and this filled in the step I couldn`t figure out. Thanks.

He has a real nice tut on converting a panaramic photo into a 'circular' panaramic via the polar filter, very tasty!

Thanks for the link WJ ~Vp~

I haven't tried his method of tiling just yet, but I have been fiddling with this method of equalizing. Hmmm. Mixed results. For now I think I'll stick to tweaking by hand with Levels.

You get good results, DB?

VP, you need to play with Polar Coords more often.

I know WJ, but that friggin vertical line I keep gettin just pisses me awf , so I often give up with it. (as mentioned in a prior fread).

Clone the ferker over?

I think he's losing some detail there.

There's another way to handle it without losing detail.

I do this all the time when creating my tileable textures.

1) Create a new layer and make a judgement about which direction the light is coming from.

2) On the new top layer, create a black-to-white gradient (or appropriate color for tonal correction) on the new layer. Obviously, place the dark part of the gradient over the light areas and the light part of the gradient over the dark areas. Sometimes you have to go back and do this step a 2nd or 3rd time....once to correct for brightness and a 2nd or 3rd time to correct for color/tone.

3) Adjust the opacity of the gradient until the bright areas are even with the dark areas and the detail is preserved. I find 14% to be a common opacity. There must be some scientific explanation that light falls-off a certain amount across a surface perpendicular to the camera. Otherwise, it's usually 10%-20%. I use both the "multiply" and "normal" blending modes.

4) Then flatten, offset, check the results, and go back and adjust accordingly. Use the history palette to undo results when necessary.

5) Once you have even lightness/darkness across the image, adjust the contrast using levels or curves to pop the detail back up.

Since lighting is never even in real life, even under an overcast sky, I have to do this with almost every texture I create. I find this method preserves the most detail, even though it requires a bit of a judgement call.



[This message has been edited by Scott99999 (edited 03-27-2002).]

Flatten ?

the ultimate sin in PS! heh

LOL I know what you mean. It was that line that eventually led me to accidentally turning a photo "inside-out". Clone, Smudge, whatever. I know you're not afraid of getting your hands dirty, VP. Sometimes I prefer to Offset, wax the line, then Polar Coords.

Hey, Scott. Another method to play with. Cool.

edit: Damn people posting while I'm taking my time with my post.


[This message has been edited by warjournal (edited 03-27-2002).]

quote:

---

Sometimes I prefer to Offset, wax the line, then Polar Coords.

---

when ya get time, elaborate would ya? cheers, its late here ya know! lol

OK, well, here are my attempts using his original. (you can see, timed at about 5 minutes with upload and posting)

You can save an unflattened version if you need to (I always do).

I did the gradient 3x, twice with color and once with black.

I then did a feather and copy-and-paste of a small area to knock out a highlight that would repeat.

Here are the results. I think they're better.

HIS:


MINE:



TILED:





[This message has been edited by Scott99999 (edited 03-27-2002).]

*gets fish out*

Welcome to the Asylum! couldnt optimise those images could ya?

I'll have to have a go at your method over the hols, but the last one, tiled, looks kinda perspectivefied? seams/repetitive pattern looks a little too obvious imho.

I'll let ya know how me experiments turn out at the w/e

Well, normally I would spend more time cloning to knock out the obvious highlights or dark areas that are too distinctive. This one was a quickie for illustration purposes only.

I find a better method for correcting "problem" areas of repetition is to make a small selection of the texture, feather, copy and paste. You can then adjust the opacity on the pasted layer over problem areas to "tone down" obvious highlights or "tone up" obvious shadows.

He just kind of decreases contrast across the whole thing, which accomplishes the same final effect, but loses detail and richness.

My method takes more judgement than his, but once you're used to it, I feel it achieves a better final result.


[This message has been edited by Scott99999 (edited 03-27-2002).]

It's getting later here, too. Girlie is still up and driving me nuts.

Get your photo all set to run Polar Coords. Before you run Polar Coords, run Offset and only use Horizontal. That line you see is where the left and right don't match, which is the exact same line you get when you run Polar Coords. Sometimes I blur it out before I run Polar Coords.

Blah! Make sense?

Oh...and one other thing...

You want highlights and shadows. Depending on where you place the texture and how you wrap it, the repetition really shouldn't be that noticeable. That's where you need a skilled 3D artist to know how to place it.

I watched all of Shrek and tried to pull out repetitive textures. I think I only found two!!!!

If you're watching it sometime...check out the tree bark in the forest. You'll spot it.

Am I a loser or what? I practically jumped up and down when I found it.

Good work Scott. I too thought the wood in the mentioned tutorial had entirely lost its life.

"Flatten ?

the ultimate sin in PS! heh"

I made an action that saves then duplicates then flattens the top image. Very useful.

NOOO!!! I was in the middle of writing a very similar tutorial for the gurus! Just my luck, its already been done!

Schitzo

quote:

---

I made an action that saves then duplicates then flattens the top image. Very useful.

---

wouldn't a copy/merge be easier? just make a new layer @ the top of the layer stack, link it to all the other layers, then CTRL + ALT + E?

just seems pretty quick to me. heh

Raptor lives!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! woo hoo.. still recovering from your b'day? LOL.. so what gives over at FX Rap? email me would ya?

WJ : Good results? Yes, and no.
Sometimes the blur thingy works, sometimes it just sorta washes out. Haven`t figured out why, yet. I think, maybe I`m under bluring, and washing out the details. It doesn`t kill the really bright highs ( like overexposed) right either...
What I was doing before was nudging the inverted layer, and experimenting w/ layer modes. Got some interesting effects, but not what I was looking for.

BTW, that *inside out* thing is WAY too cool.

VP - almost missed your post, heh. they're up now.