Bob wrote:
> 
> Too bad you hadn't tried the iso surface function in Super Patch instead. I haven't
used
> it myself but it would have probably been a good replacement.
> I'm not in-the-know about HFs at all but from what I can make out about them they
are
> peculiar it seems. I was guessing all wrong when I said before that maybe they have
> peaks and valleys at the white and black pixels (centrally that is), of course they
> don't really I suppose, otherwise any single white pixel from the image used would
> create a high point within itself. This does not seem to be the case. In fact, I
cannot
> really discern what is going on. The test HF I tried out showed several confusing
> "faces" to the thing. From one vantage there appeared to be 3 stepped levels of
white
> and black, and another suggests a double triangle for each pixel. I expected to get
> either of two things, a spike and anti spike or a square high plateau and low one.
> Even though I'm still not certain I'm now guessing it's a pair of triangles to
divide
> each pixel, which is strange because how does it get its orientation? Unless its
> actually 4 triangles for each, and in that case there should be a central peak (or
> vertex at least).

I believe the orientation is arbitrary, but the height field is indeed
divided into 2 triangles per pixel.

Lummox JR

Post a reply to this message