Re: [PyOpenGL-Users] texture arrays or 3 textures

[Ian M. <geo...@gm...>]

On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Philip Winston <pwi...@gm...> wrote:

> That's not very encouraging...  so are "texture arrays" even worse?
>
Portability is not really such a huge problem.  It's just not given
functionality.  Newer cards probably support it; it's much older cards that
will difficulty, as is evident here:
http://www.opengl.org/resources/code/samples/sig99/advanced99/notes/node390.html.
Although, if you're writing for cards with programmable shaders, then
chances are 3D texturing will be supported in all its glory.

> That's what we do now and it is a little complex.  The shader needs to know
> the shape/size of the texture and do a bit of math to convert from RGB index
> to UV.  With a 3D texture it seems we can directly use the RGB index as the
> STR coordinates for a 256x256xN texture.  The texture can be only as deep as
> is needed, based on the size of the colormap.
>

> So older cards don't like 3D Textures or does it continue to be a problem
> even for newer hardware?  We have only two dozen users, mostly newish Quadro
> 3800 cards.
>
Then you're probably fine.  A 3D texture is great, especially for new cards
and future cards.

> -Philip

Ian