>   If I have understood it correctly, I think that the idea behind the
decision
> that they were not included in 3.5 is that they are too specific. By this
> I mean that the goal for pov4 is to create some generic way of defining
> surface properties which allows, among other things, to create blurred
> reflection/refraction effects defined by the user.

Interesting. I have no idea how that can be, but if they do, so be it.

>   I suppose these would require tesselation.

Hence the reason I include it after tesselation in the list. :)

>   What would be more efficient than using meshes?

The paper discusses optimization algorithms to reduce triangle counts /
memory consumption for large meshes, I think. At least that's what skimming
it very quickly revealed to me. :)

Post a reply to this message