L-System Uvs

[LaidlawFX]

So I spent the better part of a day smacking my head with laying out slightly better UVs on an L-System than with the polywire. I guess it's kind of relative whether it worked out better, or not based on what it gets used for. My method slides while growing, and the control-ability is do to scaling based on inverted point numbers, not $WIDTH, which I tried to get to work most of the day based from the procedural road system tutorial, but no dice. The system I believe should be able to work better, but I got stumped and I'm putting it on the shelf here encase somebody else runs down this road.

The metaball version was here

LsystemUVs.hip

[Macha]

I'm interested in this too. Do you want the UV to be static, or scale with the plant?

If it is static, I thought one way of doing it would be to create the uvw coordinates manually (with an attribute-create) and calculate it's value with something like

$TX / size_of_a_custom_bounding_box * repeat_parameter

but somehow it doesn't take into the account the w dimension. I wonder why, since it's there by default in the detail pane whenever we create a uv map.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Macha

[LaidlawFX]

I'm interested in this too. Do you want the UV to be static, or scale with the plant?

If it is static, I thought one way of doing it would be to create the uvw coordinates manually (with an attribute-create) and calculate it's value with something like

$TX / size_of_a_custom_bounding_box * repeat_parameter

but somehow it doesn't take into the account the w dimension. I wonder why, since it's there by default in the detail pane whenever we create a uv map.

Preferably grow with the plant, kind of like the poly wire, though there is a little natural sliding in a real plant with growth when it stretches and scales.... so some error would be ?nice?

one of the mods to the script i posted was inserting this if then statement into the sweep(thanks Rich), with references to the base and tip thickness you have a-lot more control-ability. The script below was implemented into the sweep inside an .otl, because you can't extract the sweep parameter at a higher level and still have access to the point numbers. In a sense it makes the artist life easier.

if((($PT*(ch("../Base_Thickness5")))<=(ch("../Tip_Thickness5"))),(ch("../Tip_Thickness5")),($PT*(ch("../Base_Thickness5"))))

if((($PT*.2)<=.8),.8,($PT*.2))