[Bf-committers] Proposal: to remove the TexFace options

[Dalai Felinto]

Hello again,
it's poke time :) Benoit started reviewing the code and so far things seem
stable.

So I just want to announce new builds here, where back-compatibility is
completely handled.
http://graphicall.org/dfelinto (this time OSX, Win32 and Lin64)

For feedback from users I just created a new post in BlenderArtists:
http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?226758-Feedback-in-new-material-options-(replacement-for-texface)

For coders the codereviewer still seems the best place for that:
http://codereview.appspot.com/4289041/


Best regards,
Dalai

2011/7/7 Dalai Felinto <dfelinto at gmail.com>

> Hello all,
> a quick update:
>
> The backward compatibility part of the patch is finished. I'm
> currently waiting for Benoit's review (he said he will try to put time
> on it in the coming days/week(s)).  I also updated the docs [1] with
> the final UI and details in how the backward compatibility was done.
>
> I built it for OSX and Win only this time. Linux is still to come (or
> if you build it there, please let me know the graphicall link).
> OSX build - http://graphicall.org/392
> Win64 buld - http://graphicall.org/394
>
> The patch [2], comments and feedback are welcomed here or in the tracker:
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4289041/
>
> [1] - http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Dfelinto/TexFace
> [2] - http://codereview.appspot.com/download/issue4289041_38001.diff
>
> Thanks,
> Dalai
>
> 2011/3/11 Dalai Felinto <dfelinto at gmail.com>:
> > Hi Erwin,
> > as with the rest of functionalities you can't per face but per
> > material. In the tracker there is an image with the UI highlights:
> > http://www.pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=9863
> >
> > It's in the header of the "Physics" tab in the material panel (and
> > it's on by default).
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dalai
> >
> > 2011/3/11 Erwin Coumans <erwin.coumans at gmail.com>:
> >>>>think it can be usefull to have Collision by Face."
> >>>There is a new checkbox by the Physics panel. Turn it off and
> >>>collision goes away.
> >>
> >> It is not clear: is there still an option to turn on/off collision per
> >> face?
> >> That is a very useful feature we shouldn't drop I think.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Erwin
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11 March 2011 10:16, Dalai Felinto <dfelinto at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> @Michael Williamson:
> >>> "How do the changes affect GL view and the texture painting workflow?"
> >>> It shouldn't affect the texture painting workflow. I haven't test it
> >>> but the part of the UV struct I'm touching is barely used in Blender
> >>> itself )other
> >>>
> >>> @Carsten Wartmann:
> >>> "How is it working together with GLSL? [Alpha]"
> >>> GLSL handles alpha differently (in 2.49 and trunk). AFAIK for a
> >>> billboard in Multitexture and Facetexture we set the alpha to 0.0,
> >>> while in GLSL the alpha has to be 1.0. I find this awful (UI-wise) but
> >>> this is how Blender has been working since ever (?). I would love to
> >>> make TextureFace and Multitexture to follow GLSL, it should be easy, a
> >>> matter of doing a doversion and value=1.0 - value. But since this
> >>> change has nothing to do with the patch it was left out.
> >>>
> >>> "Where is the "Collision" flag from the Face Textures is handled? I
> >>> think it can be usefull to have Collision by Face."
> >>> There is a new checkbox by the Physics panel. Turn it off and
> >>> collision goes away.
> >>> There is a part in the bullet code that is still checking for
> >>> TF_COLLISION (old TexFace flag for collision). I haven't touched it
> >>> yet, but it shouldn't matter.
> >>>
> >>> "I think you would also remove Texture Face as option from the Shading
> >>> in the Property Shelf?"
> >>> I'm for GLSL to support Texture Face eventually. Multitexture supports
> >>> it (it always did). So if we remove it from the Options panel we will
> >>> loose the functionality of not having to set a specific texture per
> >>> mesh. It's useful if you have different objects sharing the same
> >>> material but using different textures.
> >>>
> >>> "Beside this and my doubts about the time when to incorporate this I
> >>> think your work is very valuable and simplifies things."
> >>> It's always good to hear that. Please test with the collision and
> >>> alpha suggestions above and see it it helps "solving" part of the
> >>> problems.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Dalai
> >>>
> >>> 2011/3/11 Carsten Wartmann <cw at blenderbuch.de>:
> >>> > Am 11.03.2011 13:16, schrieb Dalai Felinto:
> >>> >> I didn't address backward compatibility, so I still would like to
> hear
> >>> >> what is the best solution. I don't think an automatic conversion is
> a
> >>> >> good idea (it would affect rendering, and split materials will
> likely
> >>> >> get messy). So still looking for help into find the best alternative
> >>> >> here.
> >>> >
> >>> > Just as addition: It breaks all my game engine tutorials for my book,
> >>> > both in look (no alpha, no Add) and in functionality, I think because
> of
> >>> > the missing collision by face.
> >>> >
> >>> > Carsten
> >>> > --
> >>> > Carsten Wartmann: Autor - Dozent - 3D - Grafik
> >>> > Homepage:         http://blenderbuch.de/
> >>> > Das Blender-Buch: http://blenderbuch.de/redirect.html
> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >>> > Bf-committers mailing list
> >>> > Bf-committers at blender.org
> >>> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> >>> >
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Bf-committers mailing list
> >>> Bf-committers at blender.org
> >>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bf-committers mailing list
> >> Bf-committers at blender.org
> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
> >>
> >
>