In article <3964cdb4@news.povray.org>, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> 
wrote:

>   But the tesselation process would eat at least some of that gained time.
> Tesselation is not free.

And it is even worse if you have to go to virtual memory to hold the 
tesselated object. But still, if you have the RAM, certain objects could 
benefit, and preview renders wouldn't have to be at a high mesh 
resolution.
However, I agree that it isn't a badly needed feature.


>   How can you be sure that a tesselated version of a (complicated) object
> completely contains the original object?

I don't really understand what you mean by this...if you are talking 
about the "placeholders" for objects that can't be tesselated, they 
could be scaled to fit the bounding boxes.


> : Infinite objects are more of a problem...a plane could be two triangles 
> : with the vertices at the largest distance POV can handle
> 
>   Bad idea. Try to translate that by y*0.01 :)

Hmm, transforms might cause problems, but they might not...and anyway, a 
triangle is just a clipped plane, right? Just have the "tesselated" mode 
for a plane be "do nothing", and generate a warning.

-- 
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