Is it possible Blender to be accurate on pixel level?
In the image below:
A) Part of texture zoomed 1100% (the smallest black squares are the actual pixels)
B) The same part used as Texture of the World and rendered with the same width and height of the texture.
C) The texture used as Background image for reference in the 3D View.
I know Blender is meant to be artistic tool. But sometimes accuracy helps.
Isn’t it better to have pixelated representation of an image (Like in Image Editor), at least as an option to check. If the Image Editor has it why not the Background Image? The image will be represented correctly at least once when the size of the reference is zoomed 1:1.
The same for the rendered world texture. In a normal case the texture always looks blurred and the image is offset one pixel to the right and one pixel to the top. Why not rendered as is, when the image width and height are set the same.
And finally. When one uses reference image or sequence from the camera view, and then renders that image or sequence as world texture with the 3D content the result will not be WYSIWYG. So why using that reference in first place?
I didn’t notice any change about these issues in 2.55.
I will appreciate any comment from the developers.
It’s not an issue. The images are filtered that way to avoid aliasing issues. Try a different filtering setting in the texture properties, see which one works best for you.
Thanks for reply.
Disabling Mipmap and Filtering options, does not fix the problem.
Disabling OSA also have bad effect on the image quality.
Anyway the image display in Image editor is much better than Background image display because it gives hints where individual pixels are, when zoomed in.
It’s not an issue. The images are filtered that way to avoid aliasing issues. Try a different filtering setting in the texture properties, see which one works best for you.
For textured models that is good. I am pointing at Background image display and World texture mapped with Horisont and Paper options enabled (in this case the image is stretched to fit the rendering resolution).
What aliasing issues could be for displaying flat image? There is no rotation or perspective distortion.
Thanks for pointing at this thread!
I noticed that Blender 2.5 now supports animated textures in the 3D view which is great.
Using planes as background images is an option. That’s a good thing except you must fight with the different draw options for the model (switching between wireframe, solid and textured view and still keeping the reference plane vizible won’t be as easy as toggling “Z” key)
Also fitting that plane into camera view could turn tricky.
I like the Background image concept as is. No need of additional objects in the scene. Just to be a little more flexible.
Why not using the transform tools on it too
