Received: from mail.webcom.com (mail.webcom.com [206.2.192.68]) by keeper.albany.net (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id OAA27485 for <DWARNER@ALBANY.NET>; Wed, 31 Jan 1996 14:53:07 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost by mail.webcom.com with SMTP
(1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA255837998; Wed, 31 Jan 1996 11:53:19 -0800
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 11:53:18 -0800
Errors-To: dwarner@ALBANY.NET
Message-Id: <9601311939.AA11872@garcia.com>
Errors-To: dwarner@ALBANY.NET
Reply-To: lightwave@garcia.com
Originator: lightwave@garcia.com
Sender: lightwave@garcia.com
Precedence: bulk
From: "Jason Zisk" <zisk@uhavax.hartford.edu>
To: lightwave@mail.webcom.com
Subject: Re: Advanced Texture Mapp
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Status: O
X-Status:
> The thing is, actually rendering a flattened output means I automatically
> have a nice, solid white (or whatever color you choose) filled area I can
> begin to work with in a paint program. Say, for example, I need to do
> artwork for all the different panels of a fighter plane. I can simply make
> everything else black and render each panel seperately. A little more work
> up front, but far less compared to sorting out a wireframe screen capture
> with every blasted polygon showing.
>
That is true, but you may want the wireframe sometimes to see
contour. I do see your point though. Both methods should be used.