Talk:Sculpted Prims: Technical Explanation
- Rename?
- Several commenters on the Sculpted Prims:Talk page have suggested renaming this page to facilitate the effort of consolidating and merging all the good stuff from various sculptie-related pages. I think this page could very well stand side by side with the new Sculpted Prims: FAQ page and perhaps be renamed to Sculpted Prims: Under the Hood?
⇒ Rationale: While the FAQ naturally focuses on aggregating all sorts of question, this page could provide the "anchor", i.e. a detailed technical explanation as well as definitions of technical terms specific to the area of 3D modeling / computer graphics. I think that the beginnings of a Glossary over at this page could be added to the bottom here, where it could be revised and expanded. Thoughts?
Yuu Nakamichi 16:31, 8 May 2007 (PDT)
Eddy - SWEEEET. SWEEET SWEEET SWEET. thank you. --Qarl Linden 10:15, 30 April 2007 (PDT)
PS: regarding that apple texture - by my estimate that texture has been jpeg encoded at LEAST 4 times - which probably explains why your wireframe is so jaggy. let me get you an uncompressed version later today. --Qarl Linden 10:15, 30 April 2007 (PDT)
I think I died and went to heaven. Thanks for the explanation about the uvspace and mesh, makes it easier to approximate offline. Seems like all my 3d skills will be finally used in SL, once this feature enters the grid :D --Hypatia Callisto 16:08, 30 April 2007 (PDT)
Mmmmm... where can i download this software ? :D Kerunix Flan 08:19, 2 May 2007 (PDT)
This is a great article which (almost) totally defines how sculpties will work. Only one question: I don't understand how the pole points work. Are all the points in the top and bottom rows collapsed into one point to which all the grid lines from the row above converge? If so how is this point's position determined? Or are an 'extra' 2 points added, presumably with mesh lines from every point in the top or bottom row (as appropriate). In this case, where are the extra points positioned?
- In my program I take the average position of the top and bottom rows and use that as the position for each pole, while keeping the UV coordinates the same. Collapsing the rows seems to have the same results as the SL preview so I'm guessing this is the correct behavior. Eddy Stryker 05:54, 5 May 2007 (PDT)
Could I get a clarification on the vertices vs. faces? It sounds like the sculpt map encodes vertices, but a UV map basically blocks off faces right? So let's say I have a 32x32 checkerboard pattern, and a sculp map that collapses to the 32x32 mesh as explained on this page. Ignoring things like compression artifacts and all that, are the squares of my checkerboard going to map onto the vertices of the sculp map, or is there a shift of some sort to align the texture to the spaces between the vertices? If it's a direct mapping, how are the poles handled?--Watermelon Tokyo 17:04, 24 May 2007 (PDT)