[clopez]

What am I missing from the stone map to give it a more realistic quality? How can this be achieved without displacement mapping?

C

[lsega77]

If I look at the map itself it looks pretty good but what's betraying you images is when the map reach the corners of your geometry.

without displacement I would have to suggest modeling out the stones. Bit of a pain but I think it would really tie them into the scene.

Nice image BTW.

Luis

[Matthias Wirth]

Hi clopez

nice rendering

how long is the rendertime and wich sl layer?

my renderings are ver nosie look at my topic

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... hp?t=24844

Matthias

[Mattia Sullini]

Great shot! You are right: stone is the only thing that lowers the quality of your rendering. What looks weird to my eyes is the fact that the texture hasn't been taken in neutrala light, i can see the shadows... i think that using a map whose light scheme is close to yours (or, easier, cutstones not overhanging from the wall) will make that stone wall less "stranger" in your rendering.

[Becco_UK]

clopez: I think whatever you do, that stone texture it isn't going to look good. As already mentioned the shadows do not match the rest of the scene. Whether you persist with that texture or find another one then a matching normal map may give the texture more definition.

[f.tony.torres]

While I do think the modeling is needed at the edges, I disagree with you guys on the texture. This is a drystack stone veneer with little grout in between; it will always have deep recesses to catch heavy shadows ...

[grupo4]

I agree with Becco_UK and I will add that the scale of the map seems to be wrong