Camera Mapping a bump map

[Jason Horley]

First post on this forum, so Hi to all.

I have a question about camera mapping......When choosing mapping type to be "Camera", colour spec and opacity work fine, but bump doesn't seem to have any effect. Using bump on other mapping types works fine though.

Any ideas would be appreciated.
Thanks

Jason Horley

[mattjgerard]

I could be wrong on this, but...

Bump channel relies on the fact that you aren't looking directly at the texture. The idea of a bump texture is to give you reflections off the sides and edges of the texture that you are viewing . The idea of Camera mapping as that the texture is always face the camera perfectly. Therefore there is no edges or sides to provide reflections off.

So, if you look at the texture on a surface at a perfectly perpendicular angle, and the lighting is flat (which it will be because there is no variance in the geometry) there will be no variance in the color/highlights/shadows so it will appear perfectly flat.

It makes sense in my head, but not sure that conveyed well through my fingers onto the keyboard.

[Jason Horley]

Thanks for the reply.... i see where you're coming from.
Do you think this would still be the case if you light it from a side angle? I'll try some different lighting conditions to see if it makes any difference.
For now, I've found an temporary work around by using planar mapping instead.
I'll carry on experimenting with the camera method.

[mattjgerard]

Possibly, but it still might not work, as the edges and the sides of the bump are still technically invisible to the camera because of the angle.

My question is, what is it that you are trying to achieve? Camera mapping is a pretty specific and niche mapping style, and honestly while I know basically how it works, I've never had a use for it. Its almost a workaround itself to get something to work that you can't get to work any other way.

Hope you can figure it out for what you need!

[Jason Horley]

I do concept art in the film industry (Star Wars, Jurassic World, Pacific Rim, etc), so often have to get something out very quickly.

My normal process is to do a quick model, render it in Keyshot and then paint over it in Photoshop. Most of the time using Box Mapping as the mapping type gets me where i want to be very quickly, but sometimes i need textures in a very specific position.

If i have time I'll texture the object/character properly and use UV maps, but with client deadlines often being so tight i'm always looking for short cuts.

If i only need to show the object or character from one angle for a quick presentation then camera mapping means i don't have to paint what's not visible from the chosen camera's perspective. Don't know if that makes sense?

[mattjgerard]

Sure does make sense, and took a look at your website, some pretty ace work on there!

So, yeah, that's a niche use, and I am at the end of my knowledge about camera mapping. I'll try to play with it a little this afternoon, albeit on some much more simple models

And just as a side note, I had to unfortunately turn down an internship offer at Skywalker Sound back in the day. Ended up on the Barney Show in Dallas. My Star Wars fan kids today still say I screwed that up

[Jason Horley]

Thanks........Ha, really? Too bad as Skywalker Sound do amazing stuff.

Yes, i guess i may use Keyshot for a niche market, but i love that as a renderer it's generally very easy to use, and give fast results that are really impressive.

Really hoping to see displacements at some point. I think i saw that mentioned on this forum somewhere.

I have more questions about some of the Keyshot's features so i may be asking here v soon too.

Thanks for your help though! Appreciated.

[mattjgerard]

Displacement is included in KS8, So, its on its way. And many more cool stuffs.