What do you see that's wrong here? Everything looks good to me. I would expect to get 256 256 0 which is what I get with jitter 1.5.2 on osx.

wes

Ah sorry I meant to write 256 256 0 instead of 255 255 0 :-

What I hoped to see was the dimensions of the file that is loaded. Otherwise how can you know how big your texture is? And what does 256 256 0 stand for if it's not the texture size?

-thijs

Fair enough. It actually does work....just not right away. The texture has to be bound before its adapt attribute will kick in a resize the texture and change the dim attribute. This is because Jitter is a very harsh environment for opengl and textures are sensitive creatures that need a proper home in a living opengl context. So, jit.gl.texture exhibits some delayed behavior that only kciks in when you actually use the thing. This patch shows that it works.

best, wes

Can I post that to cuteoverload.com? That made my heart warm and fuzzy! I kid I kid!

v a d e //

www.vade.info abstrakt.vade.info

aha! thanks a lot wes. I was getting really nervous about my deadline in 2 days:-)

In case anyone cares, I use this to do relative blurring of the texture. If you project a large texture onto an object, and then scale it down, the texture looks really ugly because the downsampling doesn't do interpolation. Joshua suggested to use a blurring shader. This looks really nice, but you have to set the width attribute of the shader relative to downsampling factor. To calculate the downsampling factor I needed the texture dimensions and the object scaling.

I guess it's going to work now. Thanks again.

best, -thijs