"Warp" wrote:
> Rune wrote:
> : I think one powerful feature of isosurfaces are the ability
> : to add actual bumps etc. to an object instead of faking it
> : with normals.
>
>   I wouldn't say that isosurfaces ADD bumps to ANY object.
> You can't add bumps to a sphere using an isosurface. What you
> can do is make an isosurface with the shape of a sphere and
> then modify the surface.

I know that what you're saying is correct, but I already knew that; I just
formulated myself a little bit incorrect. Other people would probably know
what I meant.

I've noticed before that you take what other people say very very literally.
Since not everybody like to spend a lot of time constructing 100% correct
sentences, maybe it would be better with a little more "tolerance" when
interpreting sentences? :-)

>   There are named functions already (like "sphere", "torus"
> and so on). Of course the list could be bigger.

The sphere one is inconsistent with regular spheres because you can't set
the center point.
But more important, a lot of objects like cones, cylinders, boxes, are as
far as I know not build in. It would be nice to have as many as possible of
those supported, and if the syntax could be similar to the syntax of regular
shapes, then that would be preferred.

>   How do you convert a julia_fractal to an isosurface? What
> about 'text'? Bicubic patches? Meshes? Polygons?

It would still be nice if just some of the object types could be supported.

>   What about infinite surfaces like planes and polys? An
> isosurface can't be infinite since it has to be contained by
> a finite object.

But the function itself can. Then the user can decide for himself which
container object to use.

>   Most CSG is easy. However, I don't know how easy is to
> make a (true) union of shapes with isosurfaces (the union
> has the peculiar feature that it has inner surfaces which
> are not removed like in merge).

It would still be nice if just some of the CSG operations were supported.
And it wouldn't bother me personally if union worked like merge. In regular
CSG I think the only advantage union has over merge, is that it is faster
(for objects that are not transparent).

Greetings,

Rune
--
\ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
/ The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
\ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated July 23)
/ Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message