Indigo Ray
![]() |
See the attached filter. One would expect the pixel-derived gradient to behave the same as the profile gradient (at max size for a square image).
I'm pretty sure this is already known to the FF team, and that they just didn't implement this feature for the beta release. But better safe than sorry! Bug_ Pixel-Based Height.ffxml |
|||
Posted: November 4, 2015 8:53 pm | ||||
Betis
![]() |
Oh weird. I wonder if it's because each pixel is a discrete value and not part of a "function" so technically it's a piece-wise function that has no "slope". It's possible this is intentional based on the nature of pixel-based calculations.
Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF All my base are belong to you. |
|||
Posted: November 5, 2015 1:40 am | ||||
xirja
![]() |
Yikes, and with a gaussian curve, even more so. Only a noticeable problem in Surface mode though.
![]() _____________________________________________________
http://web.archive.org/web/2021062908...rjadesign/ _____________________________________________________ |
|||
Posted: November 5, 2015 6:26 am | ||||
GMM
Moderator
Posts: 3491 |
Betis is correct: they are meant to behave differently. The profile gradient samples the function, while the pixel-based component returns the coordinate of a rendered pixel. The most obvious difference is in the top-left pixel: please take a color picker and measure it. The top-left pixel of the pixel-based gradient will always be black (0), while the top-left pixel of the profile gradient will never be black. |
|||
Posted: November 11, 2015 6:04 am |
Filter Forge has a thriving, vibrant, knowledgeable user community. Feel free to join us and have fun!
33,719 Registered Users
+8 new in 7 days!
153,544 Posts
+13 new in 7 days!
15,348 Topics
+71 new in year!
22 unregistered users.