It seems that Poser's global measuring standard is 0.01 unit = 1 inch. If I make a wall section 10' long (10 x 0.12 = 1.20 poser units), how do I calculate the texture size needed in pixels so I can make a brick/stone pattern in my photo/paint program. Everytime I try to figure this out my head hurts... I'm tired of seeing my textures stretch, shrink, drop pixel lines, etc. I'm sure you gurus have solved this one long ago.

You are running into two different problems. By default, most UV texture layouts are based on a 1 to 1 aspect ratio. So, if you make a square texture map and apply it to a rectangular surface (such as a wall 1 unit high by 2 units long) your texture will get stretched in one direction. Solution is to make the texture map the same aspect ratio as the surface to which it is being applied. The other problem is one of resolution (you mentioned dropping pixel lines). Even if the aspect ratio matches, if the scale that the texture appears in the final render is significantly different from the original map, the texture will be stretched or shrunk & antialiased accordingly. No way around that other than to make the map somewhat close to the same resolution that it will appear in your final render. That is to say that if your map is 1000x1000, but in the final render it only covers 200x200 pixels, naturally you are going to lose some detail as you would in any rescaling process. One size does not work as well for all renders. In this case a smaller map would yield a more faithful reproduction of the original than would a larger, higher resolution map.

Everything Nance said is correct. I've also noted that poser will stretch or squeeze any texture size or aspect ratio to fit the mesh. It is the relative placement of materials on the texture mapping that is important, not the dimesions or shape of the texture itself. That is why you need something like UVMapper to create a template (of any size or dimensions you want)to show the layout of those materials on the map.

Does anybody else do stupid things like pressing "Post a new message" for the third time after typing in excessively long responses to previous messages? (You'd think I'd learn by now...) Nance: Thanks for the heads up on the aspect ratio, that had never occurred to me - I can deal with that one. Umm...the resolution problem is a problem. You've explained it very clearly. I think I can see now why it was proving so intractable. The resolution needed has three "physical" variables: the distance of the camera to the object (in pu's), the camera's focal length (in mm), and the size of the final render (in pixels). I'm not sure if the working window's dimensions count as a significant variable since it's possible to final render to a different size (does anybody really do that?). There may not be a simple solution but I recall in early games there were generally three sizes of sprites: near, mid-range, and far - which would be swapped in and out as needed to create the illusion of depth and distance. Perhaps instead of thinking about creating "a" texture I will start thinking about "texture sets" instead. I'm thinking it may be possible to use Poser's background grid for a quick & dirty guide to the pixel resolution needed for the final render - then load the appropriate texture size indicated and work from there. Ronstuff: Ouch, ouch...you're making my head hurt again (grin). So far I've been trying to do simple tricks like getting Poser to make my painted bricks look the same on the block prop as they do on my texture image - where the texture and the template are essentially the same thing. Thank you for pointing out the next mountain I get to climb - multiple thingies stretching and squishing and warping - all in different directions - all at the same time. ow,ow,ow...

Well, 3dnickel, I think learning about UVmapper is LOT easier than trying to calculate "three 'physical' variables: the distance of the camera to the object (in pu's), the camera's focal length (in mm)and the size of the final render (in pixels)." ;) It is the UV Mapping that determines how the texture is applied to your object, not the dimensions, shape, scale, etc. If there are no UV Mapping coordinates applied to the object, the texture just gets stretched or squshed in an arbitrary fashion and the results can be very unpredictable. The program called UVMapper allows you to actually see how the texture is being applied. Without this "texture template" you are working blind.

As for the render to new window comment, I use it all the time. I usually set my document window to the right aspect ratio, but much smaller than I want my final render. That way I can fit everything on the screen at once and see all the tools. When I do go to render, I render to another window with the size I want it to be.

Ronstuff: You're absolutely right. I've been flying blind and it's been a real pain. I'm going to try the multiple texture sets (far, mid, near) with UVmapped templates and see if that will help with the resolution problem Nance described. Tubaman: My eyesight isn't so hot and I've found that when I use any window smaller than 400x400 I can't see the image clearly enough to pose it. I do render at 320x200 for web use but mostly I work & render at 640x480. Larger than that runs into the hidden tool problem. I usually keep the heirarchy window open but pushed off the side of the screen where I can pull it back as needed. Same for the animation pallet on the opposite side. Rendered animations get ported into Premiere for editing.