Remco de Korte wrote:

> Impressive.


Thanks.

> Is there any predictable relationship between the original mesh and the
> final result?


The final mesh is always confined to the convex hull of the original
vertices.  I know that isn't saying much.

However, if I make a box and subdivide it, the resulting ball (close to
spherical) will be just slightly smaller than the box.  Another part of
this thread brought up the question of interactive display of the
refined mesh; I might add that later.

> It now looks a bit like what you have when working with blobs: it needs
> a lot of experimenting to get everything the right size.
> Can you for instance be sure about the length or width of a paw or ear?


The amount of shrinkage away from the mesh depends on how sharp the
angles are between the original mesh faces.  A tetrahedron shrinks a
lot, a cube shrinks less, an icosahedron shrinks a lot less.

> Again, I think it's very impressive and it looks very, very useful,
> predictable or not.

Yep.  The people who claim to be tired of Rusty may get their wish.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message