Discussion - proposal to extend !TEXMAP specification


RE: Discussion - proposal to extend !TEXMAP specification
#37
(2026-02-11, 16:40)Magnus Forsberg Wrote: Am I understanding you all correct? 
The same ldraw code, the pattern, gets embedded into an png-image that can be projected onto a perfect, unbroken surface, 
and is included as a full fallback section in the texmap section?

Well, not the exact same code, since the pattern being mapped could be authored flat, without background areas, etc, whereas the fallback code would have to include all these things (as it currently does). Authors might opt for a simpler pattern in their fallback section (as they currently do), such as the default face currently being used for Maxifig heads.

The new method should thus be much simpler to author, and also give visually better results than either hard-coded geometry or a texmapped PNG (assuming that the embedding of LDraw code into bitmap occurs at the proper place in the rendering pipeline—i.e., after prim sub has been applied to the receiving surface, accounting for current view, zoom factor, etc.).
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Messages In This Thread
RE: Discussion - proposal to extend !TEXMAP specification - by N. W. Perry - 2026-02-12, 4:39

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)