(2026-02-13, 0:15)Travis Cobbs Wrote: So, I want to step back. Is this functionality really something that part authors will use, and is it useful enough to justify implementation?
I'm pretty sure you could get the same rendered results by creating the LDraw geometry and then saving a PNG from a top-down view in LDView with transparent background enabled, then using that PNG as a texture. I will readily admit that doing it that way is a kludge, but if all people want is the ability to model their textures in LDraw, it does the job without requiring any spec or renderer changes.
Having said all that, if part authors believe that this will be genuinely useful, I'm not opposed to implementing it.
Using a PNG this way would not give the same results, as you'd be locked into the resolution of that PNG file before you even start the program. Projected LDraw geometry would be rasterized at the other end of the pipeline, taking into account the current view/zoom level, plus maybe user settings, etc. More scalable without increasing file size.
Would authors use it? I sure would. Being able to author a flat pattern and have it projected with all the crispness of LDraw geometry onto a cylindrical or spherical part, without messing up the smoothness of that curvature—or onto something much more complex, like a Muppet head or a sheep or something? I currently consider that beyond my skill level, but the projection method seems accessible to me. My feeling is that it will encourage other, less experienced part authors to try their hand at pattern authoring.
But besides what authors want, keep in mind that it benefits the reviewing and spec side of things, too. We've kind of set the standard (and rightly so, I think) that PNG textures aren't ideal for most patterns, but we also don't hold parts solely for being texmapped (and also rightly so, I think). This creates an extra workload down the line, as authors feel the need to re-takeup a texmapped part to vectorize the pattern. Being able to have patterns done the "right" way the first time, and more easily and with better results that the current method, has got to be worthwhile.
It does also have the potential to greatly simplify the library; if the concept proves successful, it could obviate the need for the entire category of patterned parts. All you need would be a collection of pattern files, and the base parts to project them onto.
And, don't forget the possible benefits to non-patterned parts as well. If projected LDraw code can solve some of the more irksome rendering anomalies we currently have, it's certainly worth implementing.