"Kevin Wampler" <wam### [at] uarizonaedu> wrote in message
news:3D3DC1D5.1D916CFC@u.arizona.edu...
> well, I looked into this a bit further, and it looks like it's that the
> boundary between the block change in the checker pattern is at -.001 (I
> assume it's here so that a checkered plane at 0 will look ok).  This
> seems pretty obvious now, and I'm kicking myself for not having realized
> it earlier.  I suppose it's pretty unavoidable, so I won't post to
> bugreports.

Oh. Makes sense. Forgot about that kind of thing, gradient pattern too.
Thing about it is though, why is the surface of an object not using the
pattern affected also? Acts like the pattern supersedes surfaces or
something.

Post a reply to this message