On 4/28/20 12:20 PM, Alain Martel wrote:
> Le 2020-04-27 à 11:40, William F Pokorny a écrit :
> 
> I've seen and used some other ways to obtain the same :
> Using mod(Axis, Value) to manipulate the coordinates of one or even all 
> axis.
> Using warp{repeat Something}
> 
> Those can allow you to have 100's of parts, you only have to vary the 
> dimension of the container to change the number of «objects».

Yes, there's some relation to those methods.

Expect you understand, but I want to be clear the technique and aim here 
is different than a mod()/fmod() regular spacing variation. My initial 
test and image was miss-leading due spacing and appearance.

What we are working toward is a technique which allows many completely 
different functions - or patterns (object for example) - to run via a 
'pattern' wrapped, 'pattern' bounding mechanism with no requirement of 
regularity on the bounded patterns/functions/shapes.

A more complete general implementation would probably lean on cells (the 
hash3d mechanism under it) - or something similar set up just for the 
purpose. Though, strictly, the bounding part need not have a regular 
geometric basis either...

Overlap is OK and the hope is to work out how to work with / exploit 
those sorts of set ups to create complex 'stuff.' :-)

---

The 3.2x increase in VM calls in the initial test case has been bugging 
me over the past day. It should be <1.5 I think!

My guess is the map blending mechanism is NOT today avoiding dual 
interval end point evaluations where the texture/pigment pointer is 
identical. In other words, I suspect it's doing the same end point 
'evaluation' twice ahead of blending, when it could run one and return 
when they match.  On my list to dig into that thought. We'll see.

Bill P.

Post a reply to this message