POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.beta-test : Sphere sweep: Experimental version : Re: Sphere sweep: Experimental version Server Time
25 Apr 2024 01:04:18 EDT (-0400)
  Re: Sphere sweep: Experimental version  
From: William F Pokorny
Date: 16 May 2017 07:43:39
Message: <591ae5eb$1@news.povray.org>
On 05/15/2017 12:46 PM, clipka wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I'm trying out a new approach at fixing the sphere sweep issues; please
> give this version a thorough test:
>
> https://github.com/POV-Ray/povray/tree/experimental/sphere_sweep
>
> I'll build Windows binaries as soon as I find the time.
>
Absolutely a big improvement across my problem sphere_sweep problem 
collection - and more or less at speed.

1) We still sometimes get noise in the end result which I think AA will 
mostly clean up. The nosiest example is yours from Github #147:

https://github.com/POV-Ray/povray/issues/147

see the attached: LipkaFS81_Apr2010_Example.png image.

2) There is still too the ill formed polynomial into the solver planar 
when the segment coordinates are planar and the ray is perpendicular to 
the plane. See: Qfyd_Pete00_Jan19_2005.png where the scene is set up 
with an orthographic camera and the b_spline is in a plane perpendicular 
to all camera rays.

For such situations I was playing with the idea of checking for this 
special ill formed polynomial case; finding the ray intersection with th 
plane; testing if the point was this->Inside the sphere_sweep (the 
inside root solver test appears to be pretty stable result wise); then 
doing some magic with perturbed inside points I'd not sorted out... Code 
I have isn't too long so I'll include it too as an attachment with the 
thought you can probably get to a solution this faster than I can.

3) We are still exposed some to badly formed input splines. The original 
FS81/GH147 is somewhat this case. Thought about adding some sanity 
testing in the parser. Doing this generally is probably not possible, 
but perhaps something like control point spacing > some multiple of the 
max of the two radius values would make some sense. Is it worth it?

Bill P.


Post a reply to this message


Attachments:
Download 'lipkafs81_apr2010_example.png' (32 KB) Download 'qfyd_pete00_jan19_2005.png' (12 KB) Download 'workingcodefor2.txt' (3 KB)

Preview of image 'lipkafs81_apr2010_example.png'
lipkafs81_apr2010_example.png

Preview of image 'qfyd_pete00_jan19_2005.png'
qfyd_pete00_jan19_2005.png

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.