Yeee... Thanx  (Booting up POV)!
It sure helps.... 

//Spider

Stephen Lavedas wrote:
> 
> GOT IT!  (You needed an Or instead of an AND for the test...)  As part
> of my testing, I replaced vlength with the distance formula, for
> simplicity, I would suggest returning it to normal.  Also, to see the
> spheres better, I changed the finish.  Hope this helps


> 
> Steve
> 
> #declare Radius = 11;
> #declare N = 2500;
> #declare C = <0,8,0>;
> #declare s = seed(pi);
> #while (N>0)
>    sphere {
>     C
>     0.25
>     pigment { rgb <1,1,1>} finish { ambient 0.2 diffuse 0.6 }
>     #local vd=<rand(s)*(Radius * 2) - Radius,rand(s)*(Radius * 2) -
> Radius,rand(s)*(Radius * 2) - Radius>;
>     #local vld = sqrt(vd.x*vd.x + vd.y*vd.y + vd.z*vd.z);
>     #while((vld>Radius) | (vld<-Radius))
>       #local vd=<rand(s)*(Radius * 2) - Radius,rand(s)*(Radius * 2) -
> Radius,rand(s)*(Radius * 2) - Radius>;
>       #local vld = sqrt(vd.x*vd.x + vd.y*vd.y + vd.z*vd.z);
>     #end
>     translate vd
>   }
>   #declare N=N-1;
> #end
> 
> Stephen Lavedas wrote:
> >
> > I tweaked your code a bit... First thing I did was actually translate
> > the spheres (which I made larger at a radius of 0.25.  Then I changed
> > your random functions to rand(s)*(Radius * 2) - Radius so that the
> > values could be positive or negative.  Now, I expected I would be
> > treated to a roughly spherical shape made up of spheres.  Wrong.  I got
> > a roughly cubical shape made up of spheres.  This is baffling me,
> > because your test should eliminate the corners (The corners would occur
> > when all of vd's vector components were 11s (positive and negative) but
> > that should end up having a distance greater than 11.  I guess you could
> > revert to the trig.  (triangles and all...but damned if the distance
> > formula shouldn't have worked...)
> >
> > Steve
> > (I'll be messing with this, email me if you like and we'll figure this
> > sucker out)

Post a reply to this message