|
 |
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlink net> wrote:
> I was actually wondering about isosurface vs. height field.
~1s for heightfield
> An isosurface solver optimized for the constraints of a height field
> might be worth it...
Would that still work if the surfaces is modified with some other
function?
> Better smoothing would also be nice, I find it hard to believe the current
> smoothing is optimal.
SlimePOV also has an additional smoothing algorithm.
It does not look much different in this testscene, however, but maybe in
bigger, more complicated heightfields. I havn't tried that yet.
Lutz-Peter
Post a reply to this message
|
|
