at 10k you're unlikely to see issues before the fourth decimal place, at which point normally you don't care so much for a weightmap's precision anyway, most of Soft doesn't even visually display that much in text fields, but I've seen plenty people in the past taking a cavalier approach to camera clipping planes and tell others, like it was a trick worth sharing, to set the near plane to 0.00001 and the far plane to ten million. Sorting hell ensued.
It's not unheard of of people doing the same with float per vertex data of some sort. So while as long as the individual float can be described precisely, no matter the boundaries, you're usually fine, but when people start merging/aligning data sets in maps that can require both the very small and the very large, usually it goes spectacularly wrong later on when it really hurts. It's just something I find worth keeping in mind and setting domains properly so you get a warning beforehand if they are used improperly (or outright prevent it with reasonable boundaries if you plan on small numbers ending in there to begin with). On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Alan Fregtman <[email protected]>wrote: > I have integers going to about ten thousand without problems. I guess in > the millions it'd probably be a spectacularly bad idea. Good call, Raff! > > > > On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Raffaele Fragapane < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> protip #3 >> Setting values that you are free to change later on to crazy high or >> crazy low numbers is usually a spectacularly bad idea. Unless you're stuck >> with whatever domain you set (like it was before ICE), if you only need >> single digit integer parts to your numbers setting highs and lows in the >> million or more will likely get you an all-expenses-paid trip to FP >> precision issues. >> Leave yourself elbow room but set reasonable boundaries to your numerical >> domain. >> >> protip#4 >> Mixing live ICE ops on wmap boundaries and painting operations on those >> maps, at least up to 2013 on Linux, can still crash harder than a destitute >> hooker that's run out of crystal meth. Be mindful and save often when you >> do it. >> >> >> On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 4:02 AM, Alan Fregtman >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Protip #1: You can set MinWeight and MaxWeight with ICE, if you want to >>> change your mind and the WeightMapGenerator operator is gone. >>> >>> Protip #2: You can set them to crazy high/low values, which means you >>> can store things like custom IDs per point in the range of thousands. (Tip >>> courtesy of Eric T.) >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:46 PM, olivier jeannel < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Aaaaaaaaaaah ... ! >>>> Thank's ! >>>> Le 25/10/2013 18:21, Morten Bartholdy a écrit : >>>> >>>> Like David and Paul says, set the weight range from -1 to 1 - then >>>> when you paint you use Shift for painting negative values. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> MB >>>> >>>> Den 25. oktober 2013 kl. 18:02 skrev olivier jeannel >>>> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>> > I thought I did this before, but can't remember how... >>>> > >>>> > I want to paint (interractive paint, with the brush) negative values >>>> in >>>> > weightmap (-1) >>>> > All I can do is add, or subtract until I get "0" value, but can't >>>> paint >>>> > negative values. >>>> > Have we got the button to do it ? >>>> > >>>> > I managed to subtract a second weightmap in Ice, but frankly... >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it >> and let them flee like the dogs they are! >> > > -- Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!
