I found this to be a really neat and intuitive way to think about texture mapping. It's like we're taking some 2D image or picture and wrapping it or projecting it onto a 3D surface.
aravmisra
This is really helpful, as diana said above. I was wondering if there are any tradeoffs to this system, however? Increased memory storage, longer compute times to translate between the image and subsequent 3D-model, etc. It seems very intuitive, but was just wondering.
saif-m17
In response to the question above, from what I understand, there are tradeoffs with both memory usage and compute times. Some alternatives that aim to reduce the memory issue include procedural texturing, which algorithmically generates textures at runtime, and does not require you to store a detailed texture map.
muuncakez
Kind of a follow up to aravmisra... and if im thinking about this correclty... texture wrapping is a mesh, and for the sake of using the chocolate wrapper analogy, the mesh is like wrapping the basic object (the chocolate) in just the tinfoil. and then im also applying an img (santa) to that tinfoil. Does my computer have to store both the mesh (and all the data points that makes it up) as well as the applied image (and the mapping of the image to the mesh). and then, after that, I need to also apply texture as like a last layer persay (lighting and the sorts) or is the img itself being applied as the texture? and are both of these a way of approach and, if so, is one better than the other (overall or case-by-case?).
jerrymby
The way that the 2d tinfoil wraps around the 3d chocolate is a very intuitive way of thinking about how texture applies. My question is about how that would apply to a say different Santa chocolate that has a different face shape. Would the underlaying "tinfoil" be the same and the warping function changes to match the new face shape? Or does it require a different "tinfoil"?
RishSharma7
This has simplified the way I think about texture mapping by a lot. To give a guess at the question above by jerrymby, I would assume that the tinfoil does indeed need to be changed if the Santa has a different face entirely, assuming there is a significant variance in size. If the size of the object is the same, a new warping function relying on one-to-one mapping would probably get the job done, but maybe a TA can confirm?
muuncakez
@jerrymby i had the same thought when looking at the orc head in later slides! and @RishSharma7 I agree, I think if the image on the tinfoil were to stay the same it would look misplaced on a chocolate using a different mold than what the texture image was "made for". and by "made for" im thinking of an artist knowing what the molded chocolate will look like already and then creating an fitting image to bring color, artistic style, and additional effects.
I found this to be a really neat and intuitive way to think about texture mapping. It's like we're taking some 2D image or picture and wrapping it or projecting it onto a 3D surface.
This is really helpful, as diana said above. I was wondering if there are any tradeoffs to this system, however? Increased memory storage, longer compute times to translate between the image and subsequent 3D-model, etc. It seems very intuitive, but was just wondering.
In response to the question above, from what I understand, there are tradeoffs with both memory usage and compute times. Some alternatives that aim to reduce the memory issue include procedural texturing, which algorithmically generates textures at runtime, and does not require you to store a detailed texture map.
Kind of a follow up to aravmisra... and if im thinking about this correclty... texture wrapping is a mesh, and for the sake of using the chocolate wrapper analogy, the mesh is like wrapping the basic object (the chocolate) in just the tinfoil. and then im also applying an img (santa) to that tinfoil. Does my computer have to store both the mesh (and all the data points that makes it up) as well as the applied image (and the mapping of the image to the mesh). and then, after that, I need to also apply texture as like a last layer persay (lighting and the sorts) or is the img itself being applied as the texture? and are both of these a way of approach and, if so, is one better than the other (overall or case-by-case?).
The way that the 2d tinfoil wraps around the 3d chocolate is a very intuitive way of thinking about how texture applies. My question is about how that would apply to a say different Santa chocolate that has a different face shape. Would the underlaying "tinfoil" be the same and the warping function changes to match the new face shape? Or does it require a different "tinfoil"?
This has simplified the way I think about texture mapping by a lot. To give a guess at the question above by jerrymby, I would assume that the tinfoil does indeed need to be changed if the Santa has a different face entirely, assuming there is a significant variance in size. If the size of the object is the same, a new warping function relying on one-to-one mapping would probably get the job done, but maybe a TA can confirm?
@jerrymby i had the same thought when looking at the orc head in later slides! and @RishSharma7 I agree, I think if the image on the tinfoil were to stay the same it would look misplaced on a chocolate using a different mold than what the texture image was "made for". and by "made for" im thinking of an artist knowing what the molded chocolate will look like already and then creating an fitting image to bring color, artistic style, and additional effects.