Subject:
|
Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:46:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1861 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Travis Cobbs wrote:
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Don Heyse wrote:
> > Why not use the optional MATERIAL bits from this old discussion
> >
> > http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/?n=9266
> >
> > and come up with a modified ldconfig.ldr? Then implement some code
> > in LDVIEW to enable your metallic lighting goodies when ldconfig.ldr
> > contains the proper MATERIAL settings. Since we're both using opengl
> > whatever you do will probably work fine for me.
> >
> > Maybe a defacto standard is the way to get things moving here.
>
> I agree that something of that sort would be a good idea, but in the
> case of my metallic colors, I actually hand-tweaked the settings for
> each metallic color. They aren't all the same. This was done
> partially to differentiate between chrome and silver, but also
> because I liked the results that a slight blue tinge in the specular
> component gave to chrome, but that wasn't appropriate for gold. My
> tweaking was different for chrome, silver, and gold.
>
> I'm fairly happy with the results, but the only way I can think of
> to get that information into the ldconfig file would be to actually
> include specular settings there: specular exponent (shininess) and
> specular color. I don't really think that's appropriate in the
> ldconfig file, as the specular settings may be too specific to the
> renderer.
Where else would you put it?
What if you break the material settings up into two parts?
1) a material tag on the COLOURDEF line:
0 COLOURDEF 334 ChromeGold 15 0xFFC40026 MATERIAL metallic
2) a MATERIALDEF line added to the end of the file that describes
everything in the world about the material.
0 MATERIALDEF metallic Blah Blah Blah...
If you wanted to stick with your hardcoded tweaks for gold (or if I
wanted to use my slightly modified versions of your hardcoded values :^)
you could key off the metallic MATERIAL and ignore the MATERIALDEF
goodies below.
> Having said the above, having material properties added to the file
> could help a lot. However, the format of the information first has
> to be agreed upon, and then the file has to be updated. That
> discussion thread kind of petered out, with no clear consensus for a
> format.
That petered out several times already. It's time for action. Ldview
and l3p are the most likely candidates to implement MATERIAL tags,
and since you seem to be actively developing support for ldconfig.ldr
right now, I think you should just go for it.
If you're gonna be a big fat chicken, then you could always dash off
an email to the LSC first, to see what they've got so far.
Don
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Black seems wrong in ldconfig.ldr
|
| (...) I agree that something of that sort would be a good idea, but in the case of my metallic colors, I actually hand-tweaked the settings for each metallic color. They aren't all the same. This was done partially to differentiate between chrome (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jan-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
14 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
|
|
|
|
