Published points on the mapper
-
Maybe this is a bug, but I think it is a strange functionality. Maybe someone in the know can point out if all of the things I found are meant to be that way or if they are bugs (I am using 2.4.5b20), I will submit feature requests or bug reports appropriately.Published points could be a fast way to configure a mapper for a basic preset - like splitting things into precise slices it is faster than moving every point, it could just be typing the values and tabbing to the next - see my other post here http://troikatronix.com/troikatronixforum/discussion/3039/mapper-type-convert#latest to get an overview of why I want precise points for mapping.
I tried publishing points but I am a little confused. The points that I can publish are not the actual points, they are offsets, so the visual relevance of the slices is lost completely, also the output preview of the mapper does not show any change when I manipulate these points only the stage and stage preview. I am wondering what is the actual use of these offsets and where they are calculated if this is the desired behaviour.Once the offset is engaged moving the mapper quads becomes a strange and futile task, the points are just not where they should be.It seems like we can get access to mapping points on the fly with these publish points functions, that would be great to be able to type in values and read and write real mapping config from a file, or using set and get systems to distribute the values. However it should be the real points, not offsets, which means having separate published values for input and output, which would be great and very useful and would still allow the same kind of manipulation as the current system (if it is meant to work this way) but it would be much more flexible as well as just logical.Fred -
Well as you are saying, the published points are only offset value of the actual points. There was a discussion before about that. http://troikatronix.com/troikatronixforum/discussion/2363/izzymap-published-points-not-working-as-expected. Please file a feature request so we can think about the behavior again.Best Michel -
Yes, I also remember writing about this when mapping was a hidden beta feature. I will file a feature request. IMHO this current system is very strange and reasoning to keep it that way pretty thin.
-
I use it in its current format regularly. In fact this morning teaching mapping on a basic video cube.
It's just a very visual way of mapping, in fact id go as far as saying its fun.BUT; I understand 100% that the feature you suggest would be very useful. -
@Skulpture, but when you publish the points and use the offset how do you map again? The image in the mapper where you grab the points no longer corresponds to the output. Especially if you use the offset on just one slice. in the mapper it may sit right next to another slice but on the projection it is a completely different place. For me this feels like a bug, even if it is deliberate and I cannot see the use case, but maybe there is something I missed?
