-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Improvements for Photoshop Sprite Export Process #17
Comments
I would like to see an option to add padding around layers - that will make the process of editing meshes easier |
I think a feature to add padding to layers is very nice. However, since the develop branch already allows mesh editing beyond the range of the image, I think it might become a duplicated feature of that |
Turned out the padding (margin) is already implemented: |
I have been working on this issue for a while now.
|
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
The current process for exporting sprites in Photoshop requires manually selecting all the necessary layers. It's quite time-consuming to individually select and export around 20, 30, or more layers. Additionally, if there are layers with the same name, importing them into Blender results in issues, causing identically named elements to disappear. Due to these bugs and inconveniences, there is a desire to create a script to address these problems.
Describe the solution you'd like
There are several proposed improvements, primarily focusing on the following objectives:
To achieve this, several enhancement methods are suggested:
For example, if layers are organized under the structure "Character→Arms→Line→L," exporting them with names like "Character.Arms.Line.L.png" would eliminate the need to assign full names individually, reducing effort during renaming and enhancing convenience.
However, considering that layer grouping structures can vary greatly based on individual creators' preferences, the adoption of the second approach should be carefully considered. In some cases, offering it as an option might be more favorable.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: