Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> 
> > But complexity in raytracing can also be achieved with other rhings than
> > meshes like isosurfaces for detailed landscapes.
> 
> Actually, landscapes are one of the few things for which extremely efficient
> algorithms exist that are very good at limiting complexity using dynamic
> level of detail methods.  Much of these where invented because the military
> needed flight simulators* that where realistic long before hardware could
> solve the problem without clever algorithms...

Reducing the problem of generating realistic terrain display to the
requirements of 'flight simulator like' applications (meaning low
resolution, large area, possibly realtime display of heightfield data)
does not cover this problem sufficiently.  As i have mentioned elsewhere
in this thread terrain geometry is a very good example for a problem where
procedural geometry can clearly be superior to the classical hand made
mesh approach because terrain geometry is very complex but can be fairly
well described algorithmically.  

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 28 Feb. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message