Images lit this way do not show weird artifacts when processed by the emboss filter using arbitrary angles. Images lit by incident light are sensitive to angle. For an ordinary photograph, the nost natural looking effect is produced when the angle is close to the angle of incident light in the original scene.
So you have... and that raises the suspicious question of why did you change the offsets on the Shroud images?Here is your original Xray image:
Now, let's extrude it using the same settings YOU used on your bogus 3D Shroud image: Angle: 18º, Height 60 Pixels, amount 48%
What do we get? Oh, wow. We get garbage—just like you produced in your bogus Shroud picture.
Where is your claimed lack of angle dependence in back lit Xrays? Let's look at one of your examples extrusions:
Now, here is the same Xray as I extruded above using the 60 pixel (or more) offset you used in your bogus Shroud picture—which produced garbage—this time with an offset of only 9 pixels, using the exact same angle. (I did change the opacity ratio percentage from 48% to 223% to more closely match your opacity settings):
Again, Wow, it looks very similar to your examples that you claim are not dependent on angle. They aren't and the Shroud isn't. Both are, however, extremely dependent on the offset, as I have been telling you, because that is inherent in the technique.
Where is your claimed angle dependence on the Shroud? It simply does not exist. I have demonstrated that merely changing the amount of offset back to a more reasonable level restores the pseudo 3D that you claim is angle dependent. Your blurry, bogus picture is an artifact of your manipulation and/or lack of understanding of what you are doing. There is no light source angle on the Shroud.
By the way, here is your Xray, extruded to the settings used in your Shroud picture with the opacity setting you used in the Xrays:
Not very useful, is it? Unless you want a starting point for a Rorschach inkblot.
