 |
@orbweaver, is this related to the changes in 0005684? |
 |
Yes it almost certainly is. I guess we need to use wxSpinCtrlDouble to preserve the ability to use fractional values. |
|
|
To be honest I'm not quite sure of the use case or expected behaviour of fitting 0.5 texture images to a brush. When you fit a whole number of images you are aligning the boundaries of the texture to the brush, but what happens when it's just half an image? Is the edge of the image supposed to align with the left, right, top or bottom edge of the brush face, or is it just a zoomed-in portion of the center of the texture? Under what circumstances would it be important to fit exactly half a texture image, rather than adjusting the scale and offset visually? |
 |
Hi! Regarding use cases, my crew and I found the "less-than-1.0 fit" frequently-used and helpful in our workflow. Some examples: 1. For patches (i.e. pipes), we find manually adjusting the scale can be fairly time-consuming, but having them snap to 0.5 or a fractional value oftentimes gets the job done instantly for some materials. 2. For materials that include lines/portions, it's helpful to be able to quickly fill an irregularly-sized brush face. Regarding the expected alignment, we thought the default behavior for the less-than-1.0 fit in version 2.12.0 worked great. |
 |
I second Brendon's comment, that and you could always have values lower than 1.0 in previous versions of DR. |
 |
One application for sub-1.0 fits is when working with a texture atlas, since you have many small images assembled into one large image for performance reasons. |
|
|
Fixed in 9ede3773ad8da98b7f36950d89e696fdd277726f |
- Anonymous
