I’m looking for some help with texture mapping (again!).
This time, I am using Custom Mapping to map a Surface map onto “panels” in both 3D and 2D.
The image below and the attached file should help to clarify what I am trying to do.
The surfaces are not made in Rhino, they are built by an external program and exported to .3dm.
Each “panel” exists as a 3D curved surface and a 2D flattened version of the same “panel”.
Custom mapping has been used to map the image from the whole surface to the individual 3D “panels” successfully, but when I subsequently try to map the same image to the corresponding 2D “panels” this does not work.
I tried converting NURBS to Mesh and this helped but is still not working correctly as you can see in the image.
I have put a few hours into this without success. Looking at the mapping in the UV Editor, it looks right for the Mesh versions, but the result is not as expected.
Thanks for your suggestion. The conversion from 3D object to flat 2D object is done outside of Rhino by a 3rd party program.
I guess the question, therefore, is, how do I set up the mapping on the flat objects (preferably as NURBS) to match the mapping on the curved objects?
Since each of the flat objects is a kind of rectagular surface, you could create a NURBS patch per object and you get a perfect mapping. For example this texture would follow the shape of a single patch.
For example for 10 objects you could one single texture and set scale in one direction to 0.1. Now you could set the offset per patch to 0.1, 0.2, … .
Thanks again for your suggestion, unfortunately this would not be correct - the mapping on the curved object needs to be exactly copied to the flat object. In this case I have used a mapping image, but the image could be of anything.
I have attached an additional image to illustrate what I am trying to achieve but using the NURBS surfaces (image below is mesh export from a different program). I have shown the UV Editor also.
I think I understand your issue but can’t directly think of a solution. The way I understand it is that you have a double curved surface with correct mapping and a flattened version of it that basically has no knowledge about its double curved twin.
Gijs, yes I think you understand correctly. I thought, if both surfaces have same UV, then mapping would be the same. If the flat object is opened in UV editor, it can be moved but appears to be infinitely small on the UV editor image.
Micha, the mapping for the curved objects is correct in my original file i.e. only a portion of the whole image per object, like a jigsaw puzzle. What you are showing is not what I am trying to achieve here.