CompuServe Thread

Forum unknown · Videophile

#Ray Trace & 3-D

3 messages in this thread
#78945From: Aug 3, 1987 10:04 PM
The answer is 'not yet'. We provided a few homogeneous textures: dull, shiny, mirrored, semi-transparent and luminous. Texture and contour mapping is quite straightforward for ray traced rendering, but a good user interface is more illusive. Objects in SCULPT 3-D can be interactively modified, so the question is: how should the mapping change? We are looking to the user base to provide us with a list of features that they would like to see. Let me know how you would like to see IFF files mapped onto an irregular object. Would you prefer to be able to paint details directly onto each polygonal face? What textures would you like to see: wood grain, orange peel, leather, marble, hairy? How about hooks so that you could define your own textures? Let me know. Most reasonable requests will be granted.
#78952From: GreG Tsadilas/SYSOPAug 3, 1987 10:50 PM
Eric: Thank you for your speedy reply. I can see the problems faced with mapping IFF files onto an object and keeping the interface simple. Your idea about hooks for defining textures would be very handy. That would free SCULPT 3-D from having them resident. Also, in regards to painting details directly onto each polygonal face, I believe that a fairly effective and easy way is possible. Let me try to explain this: Naturally each polygonal face would be presented to you in 2D. Instead of painting an image onto the face why not supply an IFF file or brush for the design? The IFF file could be scrolled behind the polgonal face (which would act as a window of that face shape) and the desired portion of the IFF picture can be selected. I believe that this would be keeping on the 'Ease of Use Interface' track that SCULPT 3-D now has. In terms of contour mapping: It would be usefull to be able to map an IFF file onto a sphere for example. The edge of the IFF pic can be alligned with a longitude line on the sphere. The mapping can be then done. If the camera view coords. change then the new 'mapped view' of the sphere can be recalculated. Since the allignment is still available to the program, this can be easily done, thus keeping an easy to use user interface. Hope I got my ideas across well and forgive this long winded message.
#78952From: GreG Tsadilas/SYSOPAug 3, 1987 10:50 PM
Eric: Thank you for your speedy reply. I can see the problems faced with mapping IFF files onto an object and keeping the interface simple. Your idea about hooks for defining textures would be very handy. That would free SCULPT 3-D from having them resident. Also, in regards to painting details directly onto each polygonal face, I believe that a fairly effective and easy way is possible. Let me try to explain this: Naturally each polygonal face would be presented to you in 2D. Instead of painting an image onto the face why not supply an IFF file or brush for the design? The IFF file could be scrolled behind the polgonal face (which would act as a window of that face shape) and the desired portion of the IFF picture can be selected. I believe that this would be keeping on the 'Ease of Use Interface' track that SCULPT 3-D now has. In terms of contour mapping: It would be usefull to be able to map an IFF file onto a sphere for example. The edge of the IFF pic can be alligned with a longitude line on the sphere. The mapping can be then done. If the camera view coords. change then the new 'mapped view' of the sphere can be recalculated. Since the allignment is still available to the program, this can be easily done, thus keeping an easy to use user interface. Hope I got my ideas across well and forgive this long winded message.