On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Drew Smathers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, my use of the term resize was little too liberal (maybe analogous > to "canvas" resizing in gimp/photoshop vs. image resizing?). The > effect I observed were some missing "black holes" in the mapped > texture (the unfilled portions of the larger texture, I presume). If > you have any suggestions on how to gracefully handle this in a pyglet > application, I would be very interested and appreciative. Otherwise, > I will continue to force myself to only use power-of-2 images when > creating objects in blender. Only recent(ish) nvidia graphics cards will accept a texture in GL_TEXTURE_2D with non-power-2 dimensions. (Some other graphics cards will accept such a texture but run unusably slowly). So pyglet never creates such textures. In pyglet 1.1 (or SVN trunk) you can specify for the GL_TEXTURE_RECTANGLE_* target to be used, which permits non-power-2 dimension textures without performance penalty. The texture coordinates on these textures are not normalized to [0, 1] though (a decision made by OpenGL, not pyglet), so Blender-exported texture coordinates will be incorrect. It's a fact of all realtime 3D graphics (OpenGL and DirectX) that textures must have power-of -2 dimensions (besides the performance benefits, it's the only way to do mipmapping). Alex. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pyglet-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
