> You misunderstand the message (which could be clearer).  The limit
surfaces
> if a ray intersects more than 100 objects.

Ah, okay. Hm. Then there isn't much of a workaround aside of using less
objects, eh? Doesn't happen that often.

Still, how does max_trave_level make sense then? I mean, if the upper limit
for that is 256, and I'd have 100 objects, that'd be only 200 surfaces. Of
course, max_trave_level also takes care of reflections and such. But
wouldn't it be better if the objects would be limited to a number where
max_trave_level won't allow to go anyway? E.g. 129 objects or such
(129*2=258, max_trave_level would limit it anyway). That way, "too many
nested..." wouldn't pop up, or am I mistaken? Unless of course the objects
have more than one surface when I pass through them. And, ah, cause most
objects won't just have two surfaces, there's no point in adjusting the
object-limit to the max_trace_level?

Regards,
Tim

-- 
"Tim Nikias v2.0"
Homepage: <http://www.nolights.de>

Post a reply to this message