>   What you would have to do in order to simulate this is to remodel your
> entire object using isosurface functions. This is not always even
> possible, and in many cases even when possible it's prohibively
> laborious. 

Remodelling simple objects is not too difficult using IsoCSG. For
complex models, the best way is IMHO to remodel them as a mesh.

>   Secondly, it's not the best solution in all cases nor the most efficient.
> For example, if you want to bend a mesh or a heightfield it's usually
> much easier and a lot more efficient to just move the vertex points
> (assuming you have the vertex points and you can change them with
> either POV-SDL or an external program; with heightfields you usually
> can use the heightfield macros in the POV-Ray include library).

I think that's clear once you understand the difference between
triangle-represented objects and POV's primitives.

>   Sometimes, when bending simple primitives, it's much more efficient
> to model the bent result instead of trying to bend the original
> (typical example: bending a cylinder is better done with a torus
> segment).

Bent round boxes and cylinders can easily be made using the following
include file:

http://povray.tirnalong.com/ow.asp?MoreShapes

>   In any case, I think it would be much better to answer like:
>   "One possible solution is to model your object using isosurface
> functions. Isosurfaces can be bent easily."

100% ACK


Greetings,
Florian

Post a reply to this message