Hi Diogo,

> This seems counter-intuitive... I understand your reasoning, and I can't

> find a mistake in your logic, but it seems to me that the size shouldn't be

> constant (from an intuitive standpoint)...

you are probably thinking about the usual texture mapping setup, where

a projective mapping (from screen space to texture space) is performed.

In this canonical case, the texture footprint is position dependent (you

describe the mapping of projective planes by a homography, which is

linear in homogenous coordinates, but non-linear in texture/screen coordinates due to the perspective division).

Your setup is just a linear transform of a 2D subspace (you want to transform

the UV plane into the world space triangle plane), i.e. you seek a mapping of the UV-basis vectors to their respective world-space counterparts.