> (I have been explained why it was done in megapov, and I believe it is not
> the correct solution to the problem, a second transformation matrix when
> a mesh is duplicated should have been enough with enough care done for the
> texture computation; at least, it would have been less memory intensive than
> the megapov duplication of the texture)


	Could you possibly develop that point further ? This duplication
of the mesh textures is a real problem for huge texture lists. It's actually
the only reason why I don't use megapov, and why I will have to patch
POV-Ray 3.5 as I did for 3.1g.
	So, if you know of a better solution involving a second matrix,
I'd like to see it  :o)

Post a reply to this message