I mean to the mesh.  In that the mesh consists of verticies, edges, 
faces, uv_vectors, and normals.  Transforming the verticies will 
generally transform the edges and faces with which they are associated 
unless my understanding of meshes is fundamentally flawed.  Normally, UV 
coordinates will want to be preserved, not transformed, but then again I 
didn't add uv_vectors in the first place so it wasn't relevant but I can 
see how this might be to others in some cases.  This leaves normals, 
which are transformed similarly to the verticies without any ill 
effects, at least in the transforms I performed.  I'd be interested in 
knowing specifically what problems you can foresee with this sort of 
mesh transformation so that I can try to come up with a solution.

Thanks,

Peter D.

Warp wrote:
> Peter Duthie <pd_### [at] warlordsofbeercom> wrote:
> 
>>does a non linear transform (cylindrical wrapping)
> 
> 
> ... to the vertex points, you mean?
> 
>   (Technically a mesh is more than just its vertex points, and performing
> a transformation on the vertex points is not the same thing as performing
> a transfromation on the mesh.)
>

Post a reply to this message