In article <3995C000.235C4553@club-internet.fr>, Francois Dispot 
<woz### [at] club-internetfr> wrote:

> The advantage is that there is no equation here to describe the object;
> the proximity pattern does all the job.

Actually, one of my planned enhancements to the proximity pattern 
consists of adding a proximity function to some of the shapes...objects 
which can't be computed this way, like some CSG's, would still use the 
sample method, but objects like spheres and boxes would use their own 
equations. Of course, all this would be hidden from the user...


> The sad point is that the rendering times are absolutely insane.
> As Chris wrote, there is a granularity issue here, and very strong
> sampling for the proximity detection, high accuracy for the isosurface,
> and a bit of AA are necessary to get a fairly ugly and tiny image of a
> very simple object.

The above enhancement wouldn't only speed up the pattern, it would also 
give perfectly smooth results for some objects. :-)
And of course, blobs don't need this...just use the blob pattern.


> "Material" questions could certainly be solved the same way to get the
> texture follow the object transformation.

I don't understand what you mean...

-- 
Christopher James Huff - Personal e-mail: chr### [at] maccom
TAG(Technical Assistance Group) e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
Personal Web page: http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG Web page: http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message