Hello Jakes F14.
For what do you need that?
May be you can do that with an alphatexture.
regard
nandi

Nandi, the problem with alpha textures is that they are only as good as the resolution/quality you see them at, and unfortunately, people can see them at a lower quality than you draw them. Try turning your mipmap levels right down and the filtering off, and have a look at that blimp again.

Geometry detail is controlled by you, the more polys you use, the more people see, but they can never see less than you use.

Indeed nandi
Different approaches for diffeent needs

Cutting out with alpha does have it's uses for sure

The cargo nets were made that way..just a solid disc with the net drawn on and alpha cut out



Garry

Fr. Bill wrote on Feb 28^th, 2010 at 3:52pm:



... and to whoever thinks that Fr. Bill is stating the opposite, does not know him well.  Yes, he knows a lot, but even that old fox still learns new tricks from other people!

The beauty of modelling (in general, and flightsim modelling in particular) is that no matter how much you know, there is always some little tip, trick, .... something, that "turns on a lightbulb"  in even the most experienced modeller.

nandi wrote on Mar 1^st, 2010 at 7:02am:

I have to disagree with that, sorry. I've been a professional game/software developer for over 24 years and I have never yet seen an artist that doesn't know how to work with textures. Unless it is one that has never done any 3D modelling at all.

In fact, when you are working with textures for things like the DS or mobile phones, you have to know how to work with them. You could be creating a whole games worth of textures in a 256x256 image, not just a single model's worth.

Hello LeeC
once more.

My English is not good enough to declare what is stretching.

I believe you are  an old fox.
Please declare here and show what is to do when you have 2 different
boxes and only the same textur yello with green stripe as shown left.
How get you the stripes exactly as shown.

Beginners will love you.

May be the administrator makes a new thread?

Regard
nandi

Actually, this could be quite useful just to show what we mean about different solutions for a situation... although I do think it should be a separate thread. But while we're here...

Here is that situation with 3 alternate methods to get there.

The texture sizes are purely for reference to show what size textures I used to acheive the result.

Method 1 is more time, better for texture usage, slightly worse on geometry detail. Not flexible at all, as texture coords are shared across the whole model. Better resistant to low mipmap levels as the geometry defines the edges of the colours.

Method 2 is a quicker than 1, uses less geometry detail but more texture detail. Still isn't particularly flexible as texture coords are still shared. Only the top edge of the green bar will resist low mipmap levels, the bottom edge could blur quite badly, especially with small, low-res textures.

Method 3 is the quickest, uses least geometry detail and the same texture detail as 2. Although the texture will be slightly bigger as the 2 colour changes will break the compression twice, instead of once. This is also the most vulnerable to low system specs as the whole detailing could end up blurred with a mipmap level reduction. It still uses shared texture coord space, so is still very restricted in its usage.

From there, you can evolve to numerous other methods, using combinations of shared texture space and unique coords per face. As Brett stated, with modelling and texturing, there are almost an infinite number of cats and an equally infinite number of ways to tex... sorry, skin them. 

It purely depends on what you want, but more importantly, what you want other people to see.

Edit: I wrongly used the term Planar mapped on method 3.  Just to be clear, box mapping was applied and that mapped the side faces with no further work needed, the only change needed was the mapping of the top faces.