What are the possible and good ways/best practices/etc to improve texture quality in THREE.js?
I have a scene where I have planes(cards) with 512x512px textures. How it looks you can see on images below. My problem is that textures looks blurred. I have tried to change filters and value of anisotropy and it helps, but just a little and texture still blurred. The only one way that I found when texture looks like I want - increase render size x2 and keep canvas size the same. It is bad way because of performance issues, but I don't find another way to get good texture quality.
The best quality - render size x2
Normal quality - magFilter = minFilter = THREE.LinearMipMapLinearFilter /anisotropy = 16
Bad quality - no filters
I hope for any help, thanks in advance
You hardly can do better than trilinear filtering with 16x anisotropic (and not all hardwares can achieve 16x anisotropic filtering).
However, you say your textures are 512x512, while (if your snapshots are real-size) it appear clear that:
they are rendered way smaller thant 512x512. It mean this is currently a lower mipmap level that is used to render your cardes, a mipmap generated by WebGL.
Your cards are rectangular while your textures are square. Depending how you mapped texture on your shape, this could mean the aspect-ratio change, so the sampler need to do some more interpolation (so filtering, meaning more blur)
So what you can try to do, is to:
use smaller base texture, 256x256 for example, which you done yourself with the best sharpness you can, so no min-filter is needed while WebGL sample the texture.
Adapt the mesh texture coordinates to your texture or vice versa to avoid aspect-ratio changes during texture sampling.
Related
Hello i am new to ThreeJS and texture mapping,
Let's say I have a 3D-Plane with the size of (1000x1000x1). When I apply a texture to it, it will be repeated or it will be scaled, to atleast filling the full plane.
What I try to achieve is, to change the scaling of the picture on the plane at runtime. I want the Image to get smaller and stop fitting the full plane.
I know there is a way to map each face to a part of a picture, but is it also possible to map it to a negative number in the picture, so it will be transparent?
My question is:
I UV-Mapped a Model in Blender and imported it with the UV-Coords into my ThreeJS-Code. Now i need to scale the texture down, like described before. Do I have to remap the UV-Cords or do i have to manipulate the image and add an transparent edge?
Further, will I be able on the same way to move the image on the picture?
I already achieved this kind of usage in java3d by manipulating bufferedImages and drawing them onto transparent ones. I am not sure this will be possible using javascript, so i want to know if it is possible by texture-mapping.
Thank you for your time and your suggestions!
This can be done using mapping the 3d -plane to a canvas ,where the image is drawn (fabric.js can be used for canvas drawings).Inshort set the canvas as texture for the 3d model
yourmodel.material.map = document.getElementById("yourCanvas");
Hope it helps :)
Yes. In THREE, there are some controls on the texture object..
texture.repeat, and texture.offset .. they are both Vector2()s.
To repeat the texture twice you can do texture.repeat.set(2,2);
Now if you just want to scale but NOT repeat, there is also the "wrapping mode" for the texture.
texture.wrapS (U axis) and texture.wrapT (V axis) and these can be set to:
texture.wrapS = texture.wrapT = THREE.ClampToEdgeWrapping;
This will make the edge pixels of the texture extend off to infinity when sampling, so you can position a single small texture, anywhere on the surface of your uv mapped object.
https://threejs.org/docs/#api/textures/Texture
Between those two options (including texture.rotation) you can position/repeat a texture pretty flexibly.
If you need something even more complex.. like warping the texture or changing it's colors, you may want to change the UV's in your modeller, or draw your texture image into a canvas, modify the canvas, and use the canvas as your texture image, as described in ArUns answer. Then you can modify it at runtime as well.
I'm trying and failing to work out how to achieve a quad-tree of materials (images) on a single plane, much like a Google Maps-style zoomable tile that gets more accurate the closer you get.
In short, I want to be able to have a 1x1 image texture (covering a plane that is 256 units wide and tall) that can then be replaced with a 2x2 texture, that can then be replaced with a 4x4 texture, and so on.
Like the image example below…
Ideally, I want to avoid having to create a different plane for each zoom level / number of segments. A perfect solution would allow me to break a single plane into 8x8 segments (highest zoom) and update the number of textures on the fly. So it would start with a 1x1 texture across all 64 (8x8) segments, then change into a 2x2 texture with each texture covering 4x4 segments, and so on.
Unfortunately, I can't work out how to do this. I explored setting the materialIndex for each face but you aren't able to update those after the first render so that wouldn't work. I've tried looking into UV coordinates but I don't understand how it would work in this situation, nor how to actually implement that in Three.js – there is little in the way of documentation / examples for this specific case.
A vertex shader is another option that came up in research, but again I don't know enough to understand how to construct that.
I'd appreciate any and all help with this, it will be a technique that proves valuable for other Three.js users I'm sure.
Not 100% sure what you are trying to do, whether you are talking about texture atlasing (looking up and different textures based on current setting/zooms) but if you are looking for quad-tree based texturing that increases in detail as you zoom in then this is essentially what mipmaping is and does.
(It can be also be used to do all sorts of weird things because of that, but that's another adventure entirely)
Generally mipmapping is automatic based on the filtering you use - however it sounds like you need more control over it.
I created an example hidden away in the three.js source tree which may help:
http://mrdoob.github.com/three.js/examples/webgl_materials_texture_manualmipmap.html
Which shows you how to load each mipmap level in manually, rather than have it just be automatically generated.
HTH
I use a wood texture image in my model. by default my texture is stretched on the model you see this on woodark. When I changed the repeat the texture is more stretching and I are not understand why. I search to undertand how to use right the mapping in my model with base explain but I have found only examples with colors pixels.
thank to answers
You should make sure your textures have power of two dimensions (ie. 256x256, 512x512 etc). Textures of arbitrary dimensions (NPOT) bring all kinds of mapping trouble in WebGL.
If you are unable to resize textures server-side, you can do it client-side. This link has some sample javascript code, as well as other relevant information: http://www.khronos.org/webgl/wiki/WebGL_and_OpenGL_Differences
Does opengl provide any facilities to help with image smoothing?
My project converts scientific data to textures, each of which is a single line of colored pixels which is then mapped onto the appropriate area of the image. Lines are mapped next to each other.
I'd like to do simple image smoothing of this, but am wondering of OGL can do any of it for me.
By smoothing, I mean applying a two-dimensional averaging filter to the image - effectively increasing the number of pixels but filling them with averages of nearby actual colors - basically normal image smoothing.
You can do it through a custom shader if you want. Essentially you just bind your input texture, draw it as a fullscreen quad, and in the shader just take multiple samples around each fragment, average them together, and write it out to a new texture. The new texture can be an arbitrary higher resolution than the input texture if you desire that as well.
I am doing my iPhone graphics using OpenGL. In one of my projects, I need to use an image, which I need to use as a texture in OpenGL. The .png image is 512 * 512 in size, its background is transparent, and the image has a thick blue line in its center.
When I apply my image to a polygon in OpenGL, the texture appears as if the transparent part in the image is black and the thick blue line is seen as itself. In order to remove the black part, I used blending:
glEnable(GL_BLEND);
glBlendFunc(GL_ONE, GL_ONE_MINUS_SRC_ALPHA);
Then my black part of the texture in the polygon is removed. Now only the blue band is seen. Thus the problem is solved.
But I want to add many such images and make many objects in OpenGL. I am able to do that, but the frame rate is very low when I add more and more images to objects. But when I comment out blending, the frame rate is normal, but the images are not seen.
Since I do not have good fps, the graphics are a bit slow and I get a shaky effect.
So:
1) Is there any other method than blending to solve my problem?
2) How can I improve the frame rate of my OpenGL app? What all steps need to be taken in order to implement my graphics properly?
If you want to have transparent parts of an object, the only way is to blend to pixel data for the triangle with what is currently in the buffer (what you are currently doing). Normally, when using solid textures, the new pixel data for a triangle just overwrites what ever was in buffer (as long as it is closers, ie z-buffer). But with transparency, it has start looking at the transparency of that part of the texture, look at what is behind it, all the way back to something solid. Then has combine all of those over lapping layers of transparent stuff till you get the final image.
If all you are wanting your transparency for is something like a simple tree sprite, and removing the 'stuff' form the sides of the trunk etc. Then you may be better of providing more complex geometry that actually defines the shape of the trunk and thus not need to bother with transparency.
Sadly, I don't think there is much you can do to try to speed up your FPS, other then cut down the amount of transparency you are calculating. Maybe even adding some optimization that checks images to see if it can turn of alpha blending for this image or not. Depending on how much you are trying to push through, may save time in the long wrong.