"Chris Huff" wrote:
> "Rune" wrote:
> > [Removing existing build-in patterns] would be the logical
> > extension of the philosophy that no new patterns, no matter
> > how general useful and powerful they are, can be added to
> > POV-Ray.
>
> It would be, but what does that have to do with this? Nobody
> is following that philosophy...

Well, not you maybe, but others here certainly do...

Anyway, if it's just because you think my suggested pattern is not useful
enough, please tell me why the gradient pattern, with all its limitations,
is more general-purpose useful and powerful than the "band" pattern I'm
suggesting? And I could ask the same question for lots of the other
patterns.

Anyway I really hope you'll make that extension of the wave-types you were
talking about. It would mean that a single simple pattern could work as
gradient, planar, marble, my suggested pattern, and many more.
Another pattern could work as both onion and spherical.
Wood and cylindrical like patterns could also be achieved from the same
pattern. And so on...

This really would be more flexible.

Rune
--
\ Include files, tutorials, 3D images, raytracing jokes,
/ The POV Desktop Theme, and The POV-Ray Logo Contest can
\ all be found at http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated January 6)
/ Also visit http://www.povrayusers.org

Post a reply to this message