 | | Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
|
(...) But that's different from parts authors being able to use bump mapping in a part file. Or specific colors actually being implemented as bumps/textures -- so 'rubber black' actually looks distinct from 'black'. (15 years ago, 16-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
|
(...) I was under the impression that LDView already uses bump mapping for the stud logos. Is that wrong? (15 years ago, 16-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: "Dither" colors in patterned/sticker parts
|
|
(...) 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 (...) (15 years ago, 16-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: Using MPD syntax in official part files
|
|
(...) In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Joshua Delahunty wrote: (...) In lugnet.cad.dat.parts, Travis Cobbs wrote: (...) I was actually thinking "uuencode" when I wrote this, and used hex for shorthand and because I figured it was more universally (...) (15 years ago, 11-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Using MPD syntax in official part files
|
|
(...) Yeah, what he said. (15 years ago, 11-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Using MPD syntax in official part files
|
|
(...) I really don't like this idea. I agree that it has the cool property of encapsulating everything in one file, but it has three big problems that I can think of off the top of my head: "Hex" encoding of the texture file increases its size by a (...) (15 years ago, 11-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Using MPD syntax in official part files
|
|
(...) I think this is a good one: MPD parts would be a great way to store "default" textures for texture mapping (hex encode them). That would encapsulate the design with the part, overcoming one of the big "pain points" of adopting textures. (...) (15 years ago, 11-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Using MPD syntax in official part files
|
|
(...) You know, it occurs to me that if MPD's were allowed as parts, it would be a GREAT place to put a texture file (properly hex encoded, no doubt). They're almost always single-part-only. And if one wanted better textures than "come standard?" (...) (15 years ago, 11-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Using MPD syntax in official part files
|
|
(...) Yeah, I know what's available at the low end of OpenGl. That's where I live. I was just trying to keep up the curmudgeonly atmosphere of this place with the whipper-snapper comment. Did I do it wrong? Oh well, at least there's still that gloss (...) (15 years ago, 11-Feb-10, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
