> > rendertime as well. Any ideas?
> >
> Yes...
>
>
> (Opening the pandora box...)
> The normal is available at the rendering engine level, but is not given when
> evaluating the pigment. It is possible(*) to modify the parameters of the
relevant
> functions (just adding the normal), in order to propagate that information to
> your pattern.
>
> But keep in mind that adding the normal information to a pattern means that
you
> break the orthogonality between textures and forms(**). So, doing that is not
a thing
> to be done as a quick patch, it must be the result of a long reflection
regarding
> the global philosophy of Pov.
>
> Do you really need that ?
>

In the case of the box mapping function I mentioned, the normal isn't tied to
the pattern but rather used as a pattern selection criterion. Once chosen it is
applied in the usual manner.

However, as Warp and Christoph have already mentioned, there are the slope and
uv_mapping types that fit your description already. I would further answer your
question to say yes. In the case of the slope pattern I would like to see it
optionally evaluated on a per ray basis. :

It is possible to create toon effects with the slope pattern by aiming the
direction vector at the camera. Use high ambient colors for the fill and do the
pen outlines with an overlayed, zero-ambient, color map that is mostly
transparent except for some black centered on the perpendicular vector. In the
case of a wide angle perspective shot (i.e. looking up at a tall skyscraper) the
pen outline will disappear in various places. Although fixing this is probably
more a case of breaking its orthoganality to euclidian 3-space rather than the
object itself.

I do thank you for your suggestion though. As I mentioned in my reply above to
Warp, a direct patch implementation for the box mapping would probably be the
best way to go eventually.


--
Batronyx ^"^
bat### [at] cadronhsacom //old & going away
bat### [at] alliancecablenet //new & active now.
http://www.batronyx.com

Post a reply to this message