Subject:
|
Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dat.parts
|
Date:
|
Tue, 16 Feb 2010 05:13:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
19041 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Andrew Westrate wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Joshua Delahunty wrote:
> >
> > <http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2048041&id=1532162912&l=4199f78c01>
>
>
> This is really interesting work. Just curious, but have you considered how
> you'd implement bump mapping as well? (Bump mapping would allow the "rough"
> texture on slopes, for instance. I think that would be the only application
> for it, but there are patterned slopes, so they would need both a texture and
> a bump map.)
If I'm not mistaken, two big pushes were made for texture mapping, in 2004 and
2007. Both failed because of too much committee, too little action. This after
previous attempts were made, of course, but looking at LUGNET, that's when the
big attempts were made to organize and get going.
We (a non-ALE software engineer buddy and I) have actually had texture mapping
working as a proof for one-and-a-half to two years! Before that was done, he
tried writing an application that took a bitmap (of arbitrary resolution) and
created triangles and quads from fields of color within it -- basically what a
part author does when he creates what I term "design by architecture" --
creating the design using the primitives of a mesh; which is how all part
patterns up to now have been done (albeit by hand). [side note that everyone we
showed it to HATED it -- the files bloated quite a bit, and the quality just
wasn't good enough to make it work]
The texture mapping proof that followed sat around for 6 months as I tried to
generate interest; interest that really didn't flower when the demo consisted
more of simply explaining how it could work, and how it should work.
It wasn't until I actually created the right sample texture, using gradients and
alpha channel (stuff that had always been possible, but explaining and showing
are two different things), and showed that working, that a major part author and
a major application writer got on board.
Change comes to LDRAW, but it happens very slowly. I worked with James, I worked
with Terry, I worked with Steve, and I worked with Chris. I have the plans to
go much, much further. When Turbo Pascal and EGA graphics were the norm, LDRAW
was impressive. Now that hardware transform and lighting [which is capability
ranked far beyond the needs of simple texture mapping] are nearly de rigeur, we
seem finally ready for texture mapping. It's a slow process.
I'm loathe to promise ANYTHING considering how long it's taken to get us this
far.
As the texture mapping proof sat in wait, I heard the same thing: time and
again: "MLCAD won't be able to do this; it doesn't use OpenGL, it doesn't use
graphics hardware. No one will adopt this without that." Indeed, that issue
exists.
I finally got over the hump [of convincing people that texture mapping was
"it"], and I said I wanted gloss maps, and I've been told it's not that useful,
that kind of hardware isn't available everywhere, it'll never work.
Well, we'll see. We reserved the tokens in the "language" for texture mapping
to define it, it really won't be that hard, it just takes the first person to
implement the shader language to make it happen.
My understanding of bump mapping is SLIGHTLY fuzzy (I'm not sure whether it fits
into the realm of multi-texturing, or fully in custom shaders), but I feel
FAIRLY confident enough to call that sort of invention an evolution of this
process, rather than a revolution.
Will bump mapping come to LDRAW (or at least LCAD?)?
Well, let's just say I've been paying an awful lot of attention (and drooling)
over the animation found here:
http://technic.lego.com/en-us/Products/default.aspx#8048
(click the yellow (Animation) link, wait for the zoom in on the motor). I think
that animation represents the rubber hitting the road :wink: <pause for
groaning>, and that we'll be able to do that with LCAD tools some day, without a
doubt.
Would that it not take another 15 years :)
-- joshuaD
P.S. put more succinctly, as people see the value in texture mapping, and ask
how they ever did without it, much more will be possible. Getting to where we
are now was an application of existing tools, it wasn't rocket science.
Incrementally improving it can and will happen. And I've obviously had both
gloss maps and bump maps on my mind as we've gone.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
| (...) This is really interesting work. Just curious, but have you considered how you'd implement bump mapping as well? (Bump mapping would allow the "rough" texture on slopes, for instance. I think that would be the only application for it, but (...) (15 years ago, 15-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
68 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
|
|
|
|
