|
 |
Christopher James Huff wrote:
> In article <3ea07c18$1@news.povray.org>,
> Simon Adameit <sim### [at] gaussschule-bs de> wrote:
>
>
>>>No, here you are wrong. It simply happens that CSG is harder to do if you
>>>don't use plain ray-tracing.
>>
>>I think even if people used plain raytracing, they wouldn't use CSG as
>>their primary modelling method.
>
>
> Most modellers use polygon representations to provide a real-time
> preview of the scene, and faster but lower quality scanline rendering,
> so of course when they raytrace they use the same data. Primitive CSG is
> generally faster and uses less memory, but it requires primitives that
> are harder to preview and scanline render, you generally have to
> tesselate them first. If they used pure raytracing, they would use CSG
> of primitives unless meshes were absolutely necessary, it would be the
> most efficient way to do the job.
>
Its just that most of the time meshes are absolutely necessary.
Primitive CSG is to limited in what kind of objects you can create so it
would be used but probably not much. I think the reason why CSG is used
so much in POV is that its easy to create objects this way using the
SDL. And pure raytracing doesn't mean that you are not able to model and
preview in real-time.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
