Skip to content
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

[BUG] Shadows on Coil Blocks #1585

Open
warjort opened this issue Apr 26, 2021 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #1658
Open

[BUG] Shadows on Coil Blocks #1585

warjort opened this issue Apr 26, 2021 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #1658
Labels
open for discussion type: bug Something isn't working

Comments

@warjort
Copy link
Contributor

warjort commented Apr 26, 2021

Describe the bug
I noticed when looking at #1583 that the shadows for coil blocks look wrong

For other blocks the bright part is
front: top left
top: front right

For coil blocks the bright part is kind of opposite but not quite
front: bottom
top: back

I haven't checked other faces.

Versions
Forge: 14.23.5.2487
GTCE: 1.14.0

Expected behavior
The shadows should look consistent.

I don't know what the correct fix should be.
Change the textures?
Apply some uv transformations in blockstates/wire_coil.json?

Screenshots
Some casings and tile entities showing the issue
2021-04-26_14 33 47

Comparison with apatite from forestry
2021-04-26_14 41 45

@warjort warjort added status: unverified type: bug Something isn't working labels Apr 26, 2021
@serenibyss
Copy link
Collaborator

There is no sort of "fancy render" stuff going on with these, it is just shading applied to the texture of the block itself. So I think just updating the texture would be the proper fix if we decide this needs to be addressed

@galyfray galyfray linked a pull request Jun 5, 2021 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
open for discussion type: bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants