"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:3944a980@news.povray.org...
> Scott Hill <sco### [at] innocentcom> wrote:
> :     Well, I'd personally modify the number of clone objects according to
the
> : distance an object moves - if it doesn't move it needs no clones.
>
>   My point was that the amount of transparency will not be correct even if
> the object was moving. If the object does not move more than its own
length,
> there will always be non-transparent parts.
>

    Surely that's correct ?

> : Besides,
> : surely because all the semi-transparent clones are just going to be
exactly
> : over the non-transparent original this one will show through, making it
> : completely non-transparent.
>
>   Putting one copy of the original object and several copies of
translucent
> objects doesn't give the correct result.
>

    Why not ?

--
Scott Hill. (sco### [at] innocentcom)
Software Engineer.
Author of Pandora's Box (coming to a web page soon(ish)).

*Everything in this post is IMO.*

Post a reply to this message