Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!lethe!yunexus!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!quasi-eli!cs.yale.edu!musgrave-forest
From: musgrave-forest@cs.yale.edu (F. Ken Musgrave)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: PoolTable Turing Test Photo
Message-ID: <28220@cs.yale.edu>
Date: 21 Jan 91 13:33:14 GMT
References: <22705@well.sf.ca.us> <1991Jan19.031630.3683@odin.corp.sgi.com> <7926@castle.ed.ac.uk>
Sender: news@cs.yale.edu
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven, CT 06520-2158
Lines: 23
Nntp-Posting-Host: systemsy-gw.cs.yale.edu
Originator: musgrave@bugs.CS.Yale.Edu

In article <7926@castle.ed.ac.uk> aipdc@castle.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley) writes:
>
>Has anyone done any work on making things look dirty and worn? 
>Everything in the computer-graphic world is shiny and new.

  In my images, I work my tail off to make things not appear too "computer-
perfect".  This is relatively easy to do with fractal models of nature.

  Unfortunately, not all complexity in nature is fractal.  Fractals generate
mondo complexity form a simple description; the kind of complexity I observe
in old chalkboards, worn poolballs, asphault, etc., is just not (very) fractal.
Thus it may require a lot more work to imitate convincingly.

  One can resort to the good old manual paintbox solution, but a procedural
method would be really neat to have, eh?

  "We're working on it."

						Ken
-- 
		The Fundamental Dilemma of Existentialism:

	Eschew obfuscation.			Ignore alien orders.