I've been doing some experimenting with isosurfaces.

i) The normals don't seem to look so nice as I might expect for say a plane
or sphere.  I'm imagining that it might take more computing time to get the
normal calcs right for an isosurface-- maybe the max_gradient recommendation
allows one to avoid holes rather but not optimize the look and feel of the
normal.  I've actually started trying "normal" effects with pigment_maps
instead. OR maybe I just need to keep trying the normal.  Any pointers?

ii) I've been defining a function, then using it to define a pigment map
where I can create plateaus, etc.   The pigment thus created can be turned
back into a function and used as the basis for an isosurface.   What is the
max_gradient? (Already RTFM).  Does it have a property such that if I set up
true "step functions" in my pigment that the max_gradient will skyrocket?

I'm talking about the difference between:
{[0.5 rgb 0.5] [0.5 rgb 1.0]}
and
{[0.5 rgb 0.5] [0.501 rgb 1.0]}
Do I need to introduce the latter so as to not screw up max_gradient?

iii)  As discussed in ii, I've got a pretty slick system where I can use
much of the same "typing" to set up the fuction for an isosurface with
plateaus and lakes in an isosurface  and the texture_map{} for the same iso.
Getting the texture perfectly lined up with the actual surface is a trivial
task.

I have, however, sometimes wanted to try a height_field with my
function{}because I know they are much quicker in rendering.   But when I've
tried to code-up a perfect aligment of texture and function, it just doesn't
happen.   Could someone explain how to do this, if it were possible?

Post a reply to this message