Chambers <ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> wrote:
> Look at it another way.

> If there were a feature that made boxes look a *lot* better by
> performing lighting calculations differently, would you advocate it?

  That comparison is very poor.

  Triangle meshes are by far the most common rendering primitive in
computer graphics. Basically all renderers and modellers support them,
and in fact there are lots and lots of renderers and modellers which
don't support anything else. Even when they do support something else,
eg. NURBS, they tend to be primitives which are very easily tesselable.

  If you search for models out there, they will invariably be in triangle
mesh format. Search for entire scenes out there which you can render, and
they will invariably be in triangle mesh format (or easily conversible to
one). Basically you can create entire scenes with triangle meshes, and most
people do. In other words almost anything can be (and is) done with meshes.

  A box is in no way so versatile all on its own. You can't use boxes only
in order to seriously create any scene.

  It makes a lot of sense to add enhancing features which work on meshes
only, for the exact reason that meshes are so versatile and common.

  And it's not like there would be no precedent. For example, even though
UV-mapping cannot be applied to all POV-Ray primitives, that didn't stop
people from implementing it in POV-Ray.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message