UV accuracy of the MDL format
Moderator: InsideQC Admins
4 posts
• Page 1 of 1
UV accuracy of the MDL format
by Downsider » Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:23 pm
Wondering how accurate the UV coordinates are on the MDL format. I haven't looked into it, but are they, like the vertex positions for animations/geometry also stored as bytes?
-
Downsider - Posts: 621
- Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:35 am
by frag.machine » Fri Feb 26, 2010 1:35 am
IIRC they are stored as unsigned short values. Unfortunately, that's not enough, as you may already noticed.
I know FrikaC made a cgi-bin version of the quakec interpreter once and wrote part of his website in QuakeC 
(LordHavoc)
(LordHavoc)-
frag.machine - Posts: 2090
- Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 1:49 pm
by Downsider » Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:36 am
frag.machine wrote:IIRC they are stored as unsigned short values. Unfortunately, that's not enough, as you may already noticed.
Meh. Bit on the gay side there. I'll either have to redo my UV map or add MD3 support, that is, if MD3 fixes it. If not, I'll say fuck all and drop the project or some shit like that.
-
Downsider - Posts: 621
- Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:35 am
by Spike » Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:10 am
The MDL format uses 32bit ints for texture coords. So you have texel accuracy, but not sub-texel.
MD2 uses 16bit ints for its tex coords (when did you last see a moddel with a texture wider than 32k pixels?), so no better.
MD3s use floats, and thus permit sub-texel accuracy.
MD2 uses 16bit ints for its tex coords (when did you last see a moddel with a texture wider than 32k pixels?), so no better.
MD3s use floats, and thus permit sub-texel accuracy.
- Spike
- Posts: 2892
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 3:12 am
- Location: UK
4 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest