For aniso lighting computing tangents at vertex level is a total dead-end.
Not the way to go.
You want to compute the tangents at pixel level from the underlying
parametrization chosen.
It's the best way to significantly reduce the impact of the inherent
singularities which completely destroy the
In case it's not clear. What I am saying is for actual uv unwraps use
mikktspace.
For a UV parametrization such as planar, cylindrical, spherical etc. use an
analytical
tangent evaluation at pixel level.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Morten Mikkelsen mikkels...@gmail.comwrote:
For aniso
Hi,
Replying a bit late because it seems this mail only just got through.
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Morten Mikkelsen
mikkels...@gmail.comwrote:
For aniso lighting computing tangents at vertex level is a total dead-end.
Not the way to go.
You want to compute the tangents at pixel
Ok, I can see we have an issue with singularities, but using
mikktspace does not seem ideal for anisotropic shading. There's still
many cases where you can line up the tangents quite well at UV seams
even if the UV's are not connected,
Generally this is not the case. It goes bad at least
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Morten Mikkelsen mikkels...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, I can see we have an issue with singularities, but using
mikktspace does not seem ideal for anisotropic shading. There's still
many cases where you can line up the tangents quite well at UV seams
even if the
The problem is not the sphere. The problem is the general case which will
almost never work well with per vertex averaged tangents
in the context of aniso shading. The problem is of course that almost any
case of a discontinuity will give offensive discontinuities in the
lit results because it's
