Wrapping of TexerII
The TexerII wrap does not work properly... I mean it works fine for x=2 (with y=0), but if i set x=4 then 'it' dissapears. It would be great to have that fixed, even though it isn't a major problem.
Wrapping of TexerII
11 posts
umm....did'nt get you exactly o_O
Yup, im not sure how it is actually suppose to work, wrapping in renders sounds a bit odd at first 🙂 But i just used some if's and above/below's to get around that bug (if it is a bug or intended). Check the preset "lullaby" in Finnish Flash 8 🙂
Yes, i know that it is possible using
x=(x+1)*.5;
x=x-floor(x);
x=x*2-1;
And these lines does not cost any fps at all. So i guess my wish is superflous. But by all logic the wrap should work like this in the first place.
When i posted this message yesterday i was really wishing for a wrap on SSC's. Because that is quite hard to get around by coding. But then i noticed that it is already in the wishlist, so i edited my post and removed the ssc wish.
x=(x+1)*.5;
x=x-floor(x);
x=x*2-1;
And these lines does not cost any fps at all. So i guess my wish is superflous. But by all logic the wrap should work like this in the first place.
When i posted this message yesterday i was really wishing for a wrap on SSC's. Because that is quite hard to get around by coding. But then i noticed that it is already in the wishlist, so i edited my post and removed the ssc wish.
I cant see why one would want a 'wrap' for a ssc or texer2, it seems pointless. Could someone enlighten me?
I would like the "texture" that i draw using SSCs to be perfectly tiled when i put it through a DM.
For example my parallax pipes presets (see my 2nd pack). Or look at this screenshot: http://www.deviantart.com/view/6245247/
For texerII's it is less of a problem because there exists an easy solution. But to explain a preset where you might want wrap: bubbles rising from below. If you had wrap then that could be written like this:
y=y+dy; x=cos(i*100)+v*.01;
For example my parallax pipes presets (see my 2nd pack). Or look at this screenshot: http://www.deviantart.com/view/6245247/
For texerII's it is less of a problem because there exists an easy solution. But to explain a preset where you might want wrap: bubbles rising from below. If you had wrap then that could be written like this:
y=y+dy; x=cos(i*100)+v*.01;
okay but whats wrong with an if statement for the y position that says
ypos=if(below(ypos,-[radius of bubble]),1+[radius of bubble],ypos-0.01);
that way it will wrap smoothly, its only 1 if statement. Most 'wrapping' problems have similarily simple solutions. Even complex wrap problems can be worked around.
I dont mean to smack down your wishlist idea its just that I dont think things should go on the wishlist if they can be easily implemented in code.
ypos=if(below(ypos,-[radius of bubble]),1+[radius of bubble],ypos-0.01);
that way it will wrap smoothly, its only 1 if statement. Most 'wrapping' problems have similarily simple solutions. Even complex wrap problems can be worked around.
I dont mean to smack down your wishlist idea its just that I dont think things should go on the wishlist if they can be easily implemented in code.
You are right that it has an easy solution for the texerII.
But really it is very hard for SSCs. Just try to imagine drawing a line from (0,0.9) to (0.1,1.1). If you have a good solution please explain.
I agree that the wishlist should not grow when there's little or no reason (e.g. you can easily code around it yourself). But i think in the ssc case it is easy to implement in the source code for the SSC, but practically impossible to work around in AVS code. Apparently somebody agrees with me since it is already in the wishlist from january.
But really it is very hard for SSCs. Just try to imagine drawing a line from (0,0.9) to (0.1,1.1). If you have a good solution please explain.
I agree that the wishlist should not grow when there's little or no reason (e.g. you can easily code around it yourself). But i think in the ssc case it is easy to implement in the source code for the SSC, but practically impossible to work around in AVS code. Apparently somebody agrees with me since it is already in the wishlist from january.
These features would greatly help those AVS artists who aren't so fluent with code. I know I could use them.
Well, the wrap feature is not really intended to wrap the coordinates for you. It is meant so that a particle which is partially on the window edge, will have the obscured part showing up on the other side.
Okay phunk, you have a valid point (although I could produce a solution out of spite 😛 😁 ) I've just honestly never needed such functionality.
I think that my main point with this thread, part of the fun of AVS is working with what you've got. But then I guess thats a bit too close to a generic rejection for a complex addition to AVS 😁 😁 😁
These features would greatly help those AVS artists who aren't so fluent with code.erk, thats a bit too close to a generic justification for a complex addition to AVS. If you produced a complex effect in AVS that you were proud of, then AVS was changed so that producing that effect was a very simple matter, you would feel like your original work had lost a lot of value.
I think that my main point with this thread, part of the fun of AVS is working with what you've got. But then I guess thats a bit too close to a generic rejection for a complex addition to AVS 😁 😁 😁