Question about 3d textures

[Geoff]

Hi,
There is a lithograph app running on processing at instructables. I've used it a few times, it's free. You can use a 2D greyscale drawing to generate a STL as Andrew suggested. You then merge it with the surface you want to texture. Keep in mind the following points :
- those STLs may not be 3D printable, especially if you have isolated points and small features.
- applies easily to flat surfaces, I don't know how feasible it is to bend the mesh for a non flat surface.
- dimensional accuracy will be tricky to implement (don't know if you're looking for that or not).

The 3D software I use has a repeat function (translation, rotation ...), so you can repeat simple operations (small holes, extrusion ...) but while that is simple in setup I'm afraid it is too mechanical to look natural. It would work quite well for a brick wall if you don't want to go much farther than individual bricks.

I looked at the Zbrush tutorials out of idle curiosity the other day, it seems to be very powerful for that but it doesn't come cheap. Has anyone tried to use it ? How does it come out ?

If the STL's are not printable, I don't see what good it is for this scenario sorry mate (netfabb can't fix everythig, i know.. and manually repairing a heightmap is way more time consuming than I think most peole realize.) and yeah as I said if you want to go beyond simple bricks or individual bricks then it gets tricky, we're talking a stone wall, which one would imagine to not have symmetrical bricks in it.

Zbrush is fantastic, but a horrible interface (an opinion shared by many) it's like using Blender backwards with your left hand (assuming you are right handed)

[3DPBuser]

My sketchup is of rocks made into a wall; they is no color, just the shape of old style building stones.

Where is a free place to upload it to?

[LambdaFF]

If the STL's are not printable, I don't see what good it is for this scenario sorry mate (netfabb can't fix everythig, i know.. and manually repairing a heightmap is way more time consuming than I think most peole realize.)

I'm sorry I was not clear. I just meant that not all soft processing results are 3D printable. If the 2D input has stray pixels then the result is not necessarily 3D printable. There is no fault on the soft (that I know of), it's just that FDM and SLA technology have their limitations. The end result will be a watertight mesh with correct normal orientation but that doesn't make it printable.

[awerby]

Sorry, I didn't realize we were only allowed to talk about free software here, or that any assertions made here, however positive in tone, were to be referred to as "suggestions" only. I'm sure there are free heightfield utilities out there; the technique, as was pointed out, has been in use for decades. If you're looking for one, search for "Free 2D to 3D" and see what you come up with.

Interfaces are very much a matter of personal taste; in my opinion Blender's is one of the worst I've ever encountered, but I guess it has its fans. ZBrush is somewhat non-standard in the way it's laid out, but a lot of people have used it successfully to make all sorts of amazing things. Displacement mapping is at the heart of how it works; it's developed that to a degree that no other program I know of has done. The models it makes are certainly printable, but the degree of detail that can be realized depends on the capabilities of ones printer, computer system and associated software.

Andrew Werby
www.computersculpture.com

[Geoff]

Sorry, I didn't realize we were only allowed to talk about free software here, or that any assertions made here, however positive in tone, were to be referred to as "suggestions" only. I'm sure there are free heightfield utilities out there; the technique, as was pointed out, has been in use for decades. If you're looking for one, search for "Free 2D to 3D" and see what you come up with.

Interfaces are very much a matter of personal taste; in my opinion Blender's is one of the worst I've ever encountered, but I guess it has its fans. ZBrush is somewhat non-standard in the way it's laid out, but a lot of people have used it successfully to make all sorts of amazing things. Displacement mapping is at the heart of how it works; it's developed that to a degree that no other program I know of has done. The models it makes are certainly printable, but the degree of detail that can be realized depends on the capabilities of ones printer, computer system and associated software.

Andrew Werby
www.computersculpture.com

Sorry, I didn't realize we were in a debating contest, and I didn't bring my cards!

I am not going to argue about which one is better, I have used pretty much all of them, and for people (like the guys who started this thread) who wanted to get started Blender is a good choice. It's layout is fast to learn as are the hot keys and youtube tutorials are plenty. It is good for the graphic designer.