Wasn't it Slime who wrote:
>By golly, they *are* holes. How strange. Because they're (a) the holes that
>should be there, plus (b) holes that exactly mimic where i see other parts
>of the isosurface when the plane is not cut out from it. (try rendering the
>scene without the plane, and remember where peices of the isosurface are,
>and then rerender the scene with the plane cut out, and you'll see that the
>places where the peices used to be but aren't are now holes in other parts
>of the isosurface hit by the same ray.)
>
>Looking at it from the opposite side, however, doesn't show the extra holes
>that I explained in (b). set background{rgb 1} and change the camera
>location from <0,0,-15> to <0,0,15> and you'll see that those holes
>disappear. If you then set the plane's normal from <1,1,-.5> to <1,1,.5>,
>you'll see that new holes have been cut out on the side that we were
>originally looking at.
>
>I still think there's something strange here. I can render some images if
>need be.


Did you read my points (2) and (3) or just the bit about the background? 

In particular point (3) makes a big difference to which parts of the
scene you're actually asking it to render when viewed from different
directions.

With all my three point's applied, I think you'll find that everything
behaves correctly.

-- 
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure

Post a reply to this message