virtualmeet wrote:
> If it can't be implemented then it's
> really a big "loss". Why? because every program that implented it will beat
> all the others in terms of speed calculations:

Sorry, but this is one of my pet peeves.

Yes, it will be faster, and win on that front.  If that's what you want, 
then you should never even look at ray-tracing.  Go get a 3d board from 
NVidia, and render all the triangles you want.

The problem is, you will LOSE on the quality front.  Try zooming in on a 
sphere in a CAD / modeling program, and you will see straight lines and 
hard angles.  Try zooming in on a sphere in POV-Ray, and you will see a 
smooth curve.  Why?  Because POV-Ray uses exact mathematical functions 
to represent objects.

You are essentially saying "If you just ditch your quality concerns, and 
use polygonal tessellation instead, you could have much faster renders!" 
  Well, if we WANTED to use polygonal tessellation, we wouldn't be using 
POV-Ray's isosurfaces.

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message