In article <3ed157d5$3@news.povray.org>, tim### [at] gmxde says...
> I'm not quiet sure what you're after here.
> 
> But to make one thing clear: the algorithm
> works by taking the difference from the equilibrium
> height (where the surface is fully calm), and spreads
> the heights out until they are dampened away. During
> this process they get reflected off of walls etc.
> 
> What you're suggesting seems to me like positive
> waves rolling down a surface, while negative waves
> would roll up the surface (all discrepancies are handled
> the same way). It could be possible that it looks like
> water-trails rolling down a hill, but that has to
> experimented with. And the macros so far just work
> on a rectangular grid, which should cover a lot of
> effects where water is being used, but this doesn't
> make it easier to apply onto hills...
> 
> 
> 
You got it right. So the reality is a big 'maybe'. :p Figured if your 
macros worked then it would be a serious improvement over particle 
systems which so far have proven to be of questionable use for this sort 
of thing in what examples I have seen for them. I had figured that with
a stream you would place 'channel' through the scene which would contain 
the surface and any rocks, etc. to be interacted with, then hide both 
ends so that that addition off positive and negative waves at the two 
ends would not be visible. For something like a water trails a particles 
system would still be best, though getting the particle sizes small 
enough to avoid having it look stupid (as in most cases I have seen so 
far) isn't exactly easy. For a real stream though... Definitely going to 
have to play with this thing a bit one of these days. lol

-- 
void main () {

    call functional_code()
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

Post a reply to this message