kliment wrote: This is really a big improvement! Thank you, Olivier, for pointing it out!
This is pure hasard.
Looking at another thread "Elliptical (oval) stair", i opened the "Curved Ramp 12" and noticed the change.
After some testing on old parts, it seems to work.
I am wondering if GS has some other hidden features like this one.
I think to the (in)famous sharp angle between two coplanar curved polygons, when scripting with primitives.
And additional points in general. No time for testing each tool.
If they solved it for TUBE, may be for other tools.
GS, please, some information?
Braza wrote: Could you render this example with a brick texture?...
I don't see any difference in texture rendering between Curved Ramp 11 and 12 (brick texture).
Result is the same (bad in any case), because there is not any COOR statement for texture alignment in these objects.
Even with such a statement, texture alignment is bad into AC for curved objects,
in particular for TUBE elements. Better to use another rendering software.
I am a bit blind color, so i let renderings for those who know.
I can just see artifacts when they exist, but don't count on me for something else, sorry.
I agree with you. Tube function has a bad behavior with texture mapping. IMO It should have its own texture mapping code.
I recently replaced many TUBE objects in an old project with Complex Profile Walls. The texture mapping in the Complex Profiles works beautifully, while the behavior of the old TUBES was always a mess. Out of curiosity, I dragged the walls into a Library Object 3D Script window to see what was happening with the GDL.
Each segment of the "path" has a separate VERT COOR statement which redefines the origin and direction of the texture bitmap. Incorporating this strategy into TUBE would make for some very intense GDL scripting indeed. Hopefully, a more sensible solution will be found for some future version of TUBE. Surely, the path for each segment of a TUBE object provides enough information to sucessfully re-orient the texture at each joint. This should be part of the internal GDL behavior.
In general, the texture mapping behavior of both TUBE and MASS ( and probably many of the other more esoteric GDL shapes) need to be improved somehow.
Olivier wrote: That's fast.
Thanks for that, Greg.
Hey Olivier... You are a GDL celebrity... Your voice is heard loud and clear in the GS offices...
Thank you Olivier.
The complex profile walls are a good alternative for the tube... The only problem is the file size of the project... And probably with some SEO operations it would became a giant...
About the tube mapping... Some time ago I built an object with a loop (for next) of Sweep functions with individual texture mapping for each path... The object had a bit more polys than a tube... But the mapping was perfect...
If GS could condense this routine in a single function maybe it would work...