|
 |
In article <web.3f4d2f8a8f004971d63a77300@news.povray.org>,
"gramirosimancas" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> > You make it sound like pyramid tracing could be possible in the first
> >place.
>
> I have not found any real impediment. It may be just hard.
Impractically hard. It is workable for restricted cases, but not for a
complex and flexible program such as POV.
> What's the problem?
> Just think this way:
> Instead of using a single ray, think the integral over the square pixel.
> Like instead sampling the value of a 1d function you take the integral
> between two sampling points.
You make it sound so simple...but it is far from simple. I find it
extremely unlikely you will ever get any improvement, because you will
end up resorting to sampling far too often.
> What I don't know is if these integrals are analytical in every case, as I
> haven't done any mathematics except in the 2d case where it works with
> lines and splines (but as you know this is much simpler)
Yes, it is much simpler. Try thinking about how it would work in 3D for
a bit. This is *very, very* different!
> You say this would be hard, but you also know this is not impossible.
Right, it's not impossible, if you drop all the "strange" things.
Meaning pretty much all of POV.
Pyramid tracing does not apply to POV.
--
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlink net>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
