Subject:
|
Re: Crazy, OK Heretical Idea ...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Wed, 14 May 2003 00:14:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1135 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Don Heyse wrote:
> I see what you mean. We've actually started doing this for certain
> materials such as gold, silver, chrome, and rubber. Ldview and
> ldglite already tinker with the specular properties for some of these
> materials based on the predefined color numbers. However, does
> pearlescent material come in more than one color?
Yes, there's been several different pearlescents. Mostly in Bionicle
products. Some of the colors include tan, gray, dark gray, and sand
blue. The pearlescence appears (to my eye) to be mixed in throughout
the material, not just a surface treatment. Hmm, I wonder what would it
look like if I cut through a pearlescent part?
> Cloth, and bumpy certainly do. I suppose we could set aside whole ranges of colors
> for different materials like we do for the transparent colors.
Maybe. Although I've been thinking that the bit-assignment approach
(ie, transparent color codes have bit 5 set) won't work, long-term.
Also, I'm guessing that most 'cloth' parts won't be available in a
different material. It's probably the same for nearly all other
materials -- rubber, POM, ABS, metal, etc. So those should *probably*
be specified in the part file. But some materials - pearlescence,
'chrome', maybe transparency - could/should be specified as part of a
color/material code in the model (am I repeating myself from earlier?
Sorry if I am).
So how's this idea: allow definition of a material to be part of a color
code. So you could write something like:
0 // COLOR is LDLite color def, COLORMAT associates a material
0 // with a color code.
0 COLOR 51 pearltan 6 247 231 173 255 247 231 173 255
0 COLORMAT 51 pearlescent
where 'pearlescent' would be predefined, but the parameters for a
non-predefined material could be supplied instead. If I knew what those
parameters could be, I'd spell them out -- we seem to need at least a
SPECULAR treatment, at least.
Then we could implement 'default materials' for parts that operate if
the color-code doesn't have an overriding material. So a minifig cape
would have a line like:
0 MATERIAL_DEFAULT cloth
in the part file, but if a specified silver-chrome for a cape, it would
be rendered all shiny instead of cloth-rough.
> My personal feeling is that the vector versions currently used for
> printed decorations should still always be provided.
True. But newer parts might have lower-quality vector definitions, just
as backups, if high-quality texture-mapped definitions are generally
included, and handled by most renderers.
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Crazy, OK Heretical Idea ...
|
| (...) There are also a few in Star Wars, Spybotics, and Racers, but I can't recall ever seeing any that didn't come in Technic sets. (...) Pretty much the same all the way through. Sorta. The metallic colors are produced by using a different type of (...) (22 years ago, 14-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Crazy, OK Heretical Idea ...
|
| (...) I see what you mean. We've actually started doing this for certain materials such as gold, silver, chrome, and rubber. Ldview and ldglite already tinker with the specular properties for some of these materials based on the predefined color (...) (22 years ago, 12-May-03, to lugnet.cad)
|
41 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
