=Bob wrote:

> Back to the merge thing...
> I didn't look at it too well first time. Then I realized the textures were
> added differently for the pair of boxes and pair of spheres. The boxes have a
> shared texture in the merge statement. The spheres have independent textures.
> The spheres also have a shadow showing the supposedly merged surface area
> which should be gone, and it is labeled as "correct".

The different pigments do nothing to the behavior. I checked.The demarkation line
you are seeing is due to the different
pigments and not due to internal surfaces. Otherwise they
would follow the shape of the sphere as opposed to being
a straight line.

> The boxes labeled
> "incorrect" have no shadow of the merged surfaces even when they are changed
> to have non-coincident surfaces by scaling the z of one slightly larger.

> Plus the anti-merge (or whatever) effect is gone this way too.

You lost me on this one. Care to rephrase the observation ?

> So, now what?

Which way to the circus ?

Ken Tyler

Post a reply to this message