planar texture bug

Why does planar texturemapping change texture tiling to twice that of normal texturemapping?

For the clueless, if I have a texture tiled 1x1 on normal texturemapping, then change it to planar texturemapping, the texture tiling changes to 2x2. Why? This is annoying!

Also, the texture tiling isn't even correct at 2x2 (to get the texture tile overlay to line up). I've figured it out and the correct tiling is 2x1.8 and 0x.105 offset. What kind of screwy math is this?

Because planar mapping cannot use repeats per face. Everything is repeats per meter. The nature of planar mapping is that it works like a slide projector. It doesn't and can't operate with knowledge of the surface it's projecting onto. All it knows is that it's supposed to project an image of a certain physical size. If the "screen", is the same size as the projection, you'll have 1x1. If it's twice the size of the projection, you'll have 2x2. This is not a bug in any way, shape, or form. It's perfectly normal and expected behavior, although it can be confusing if you're not familiar with it.

I posted a guide on this subject in the texture forum earlier today, just so you know.

Well how freakin' hard would it be to at least get the tiling the same? Come on...it ain't freakin' theorietical neurophysics! SL's got enough UV bugs as it is without adding yet another one! I really TIRE of half-assed implementations. Active Worlds did this ALL THE TIME and it got REAL annoying REAL quick. LL shouldn't follow in AW's incompetent footsteps!

How hard it is to get the tiling the same is up to the user. Planar mapping is what it is. There's a reason you've had the same experience with it on multiple platforms. It works the way it works and that's it. Learn to understand or don't. The choice is yours. Either way, you'd do well to stop lashing out and looking to assign blame just because you might not like the particular tool. It's just one way among many to map textures onto objects. LL didn't invent it. If you don't like it, use the old way. It's really not a big deal.

Way to miss my point (again), Chosen (you must have a reading comprehension problem). First, I've only experienced planar texturemapping with SL. Second, my issue isn't with planar texturemapping but SL's implementation of it. Any idiot can mindlessly implement something as to its default standard but it takes some finesse and intelligence to code in extrapolation and expectation. Obviously, a common texturemapping desire is to have tiling line up on sides/polygons so making the modeller/texturer have to figure this out every time is pretty stupid. I suppose it could be figured out through LSL but that's just another thing for the user to deal with instead of, logically, putting a "fit to side" (or whatever) option in.

There is NO room for hostile insults here!

Ideas can be discussed constructively with respect for one another, even if the approaches differ.

Kindness and warm explanations help get the point across more effectively.

Please be sure to read the forum Guidelines.