Mike Williams  wrote in message <GMT### [at] econymdemoncouk>:
> Here's a comparison of using an isosurface vs using height_field with a
> function.
> 
> http://www.econym.demon.co.uk/isotut/patterns.htm#hf

This whole page is quite interesting. Regarding isosurface vs. height_field,
it says pretty much what should be expected: height_field is faster but
requires more memory, but isosurface is more detailed and
resolution-independent.

Post a reply to this message