In article <3c2515a3@news.povray.org> , "JRG" <jrg### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:

> The problem arises if
> you're using radiosity, since the *no_image* wall won't *participate* to the
> radiosity calculations, which is not what I want.

Well, this is exactly like in the real world: If something is invisible you
can't see it.  (Of course, no_reflection isn't natural either.)

However, your idea of a "visibility_level flag" is fundamentally flawed.
First of all, you say it is a flag but what you say it should do has nothing
to do with a flag.  More important, what you want it to do is actually three
(or more?) things in one.  But how would you combine effects?  You soon have
to start assigning arbitrary numbers to effects, which makes it unusable
without a table that maps effect combinations to numbers.

And as for your "if n> max_trace_level-1 the object wouldn't be visible at
all" idea, well, how do you define the maximum level?  What intersections
would count and how would one define which intersections count?  Remember
that an object can have any from 0 to and infinite number of intersections.
So depending on the viewpoint you could have ten intersections with one
object while from another you only have two.

In no way would make the feature you suggest any sense.

A much more practical solution to your problem would be to design your scene
so that the camera fits properly "inside".  After all, the effect you want
is physically impossible a camera looking through a invisible wall that is
visible in indirect reflections.  Maybe you should simply consider a
different camera type and some creativity of what you have got rather than
thinking of the most complicated possible solution to such a simple problem
as perspective camera distortion effects...


    Thorsten


____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message