Texture Mapping extension

Re: Texture Mapping extension
Allen Smith Wrote:The whole point of having a texture meta is so official LDraw parts can be created using it.

LDraw is a terrible language for making illustrations. Rather than spending huge amounts of time perfecting printed parts using LDraw geometry, people could make high-quality textures in minutes/hours. People who are good at part authoring could focus on real challenges instead. People who stink at part authoring (like me) could meaningfully contribute.

That's not going to happen if there's no agreed-upon standard to do so. That would be sad.


All the very solid reasons I've spent two years using and proving the technology.

It was one of the principles who first helped create the LDRAW committees who convinced me not to seek ratification, however. Innovation rarely occurs in a bureaucracy.

When I worked with James (and then Terry, and Steve), the goal was to invent means to get our work done, not have rules and roadblocks and limitations on our work. This is why I decided (and told Travis over a year ago) that I didn't want the LSC's involvement.

I've been discussing the situation with my co-author. We didn't intend for the work to be placed into public view in this manner, but that's just something we're having to deal with...
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »

Messages In This Thread
Re: Texture Mapping extension - by Joshua Delahunty - 2012-04-13, 5:01
Re: Texture Mapping extension - by Tim Gould - 2012-04-14, 22:08
Re: Texture Mapping extension - by Tim Gould - 2012-11-15, 22:51
Re: Texture Mapping extension - by Tim Gould - 2012-11-30, 21:55

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)