"Mike Thorn" <mik### [at] realitycheckmultimediacom> wrote in message
news:4194a758$1@news.povray.org...
>Why do people often use planes (a huge
> infinite object) to do CSG or create more complex geometrical figures?
> Wouldn't it be easier in terms of size to use something a little
> smaller, like a box?
>
> Or is rendering speed the answer?

I find it easier to visualise with planes. Particularly when you need to
rotate and translate the cutting surface.
If you use a box, then you need to be a bit careful about where all of the
other faces of the box will end up after rotation and translation, otherwise
you could end up with spurious offcuts, floating around where you don't want
them to be.

I don't know whether there's a speed difference. When I used CSG in a hair
macro I used boxes to cut each hair as I assumed that they were more
efficient than planes, but I don't know if that's true.

Post a reply to this message