ABX wrote:
> On Tue, 11 May 2004 21:10:13 +0200, Florian Brucker
> <tor### [at] torfboldcom> wrote:
>> So: What is the idea behind this? Will the concept
>> of splines be changed to a more uniform one in
>> POV 4.0 (yes, I did read the output on the message
>> window telling me that splines are a experimental
>> feature :)?
>
> The idea behind it is most probably... lack of idea :-(

That's my impression too.

I even think that at one point in the development of POV-Ray 3.5, the
spline type now known as natural_spline was planned to be implemented
under the name cubic_spline, despite the fact that it's a completely
different type of cubic_spline than the one used in prisms. Luckily
those plans were changed.

> IIRC splines{} are basically content of patch ported to 3.5.

No, they were very much rewritten from scratch I think.

>> And I got another 2 questions (which are unrelated to
>> the questions above): - Why isn't it possible to use
>> bezier_spline in spline identifiers?
>
> Because nobody made it yet ?

I'm curious how the clock values would work for bezier splines. For
cubic splines the clock values change not just the time dimension but
also the path of the spline, since it works by adjusting the tangent
control points (which the user can't control in a cubic spline).
However, with bezier splines the user controls the tangent control
points directly, so having the program adjust those to make them fit the
clock values might seem odd.

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
rune|vision:  http://runevision.com **updated Apr 27**
POV-Ray Ring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message