Subject:
|
Re: Texture mapping spec? (was Re: Doing Patterns and Bitmaps in MLCad)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.mlcad, lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 6 Sep 2000 19:38:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2492 times
|
| |
|
|
"Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message
news:4gvcrs8kb1v5s0ndgg18619ropc62foh9p@4ax.com...
> In lugnet.cad.mlcad, Farlie A wrote:
>
> > In lugnet.cad.mlcad, Steve Bliss writes:
> > > Urg. Why so wordy? Just do:
> >
> > Sorry, Computing course at college showing through. (We were told try and
> > specify EVERYTHING. Unfotunatly there is no concrete defintion of what
> > EVREYTHING is.)
>
> :) I know what you mean.
>
> > I am inclinded to agree with your suggestion above, but are they able to • cope
> > with 'nested' textures such as those included by line type 1?
>
> Hmm. There shouldn't be any need for 'nested' textures. Or is 'nested
> texturing' an area of texture-mapping that I don't know about?
I can't think of any reason to "nest" textures. The only reasons I know of
to draw multiple textures over one another are to produce different effects
(such as lighting, water ripples, etc.). Since all the textures that show
up on LEGO pieces are, by definition, static, I wouldn't think that
multi-pass texturing would be needed.
In addition, even if the DAT version of a texture contains other DAT files
which contain sub-textures (say, to produce a repeating pattern), the bitmap
representation at the top level would have to contain the composite texture
which would automatically include any sub-textures. In this case, it would
seem that it would usually be more reasonable to just skip the top-level
texture declaration and just allow the sub-textures to be drawn.
--Travis Cobbs (tcobbs@san.REMOVE.rr.com)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
24 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
|
|
|
|
