Wasn't it Remco de Korte who wrote:

>I considered using triangles or a mesh, which would have been much faster were
>it not that I want the front and back of the sheet to have a different pigment.
>In fact, in the original object I use image_maps. That doesn't affect the speed
>much.
>I also thought about using triangles and alternating the pigment depending on
>which side is face towards the camera but I couldn't figure out how to do that
>in POV. 
>Two thin boxes seemed like the easiest way.

Err, at the moment your object is actually the same colour on both
sides. I think you meant to write

  #declare origami=
  union{
    object{front}
    object{back}
  }

instead of 

  #declare origami=object{front}
  union{
    object{front}
    object{back}
  }

In this version "origami" is #declared to be the red box, and then a
copy of the bi-coloured box is rendered.


It's possible to have meshes (or anything else) with different textures
on each side in MegaPOV, by using the "interior_texture" keyword.


>
>As J. Grimbert noted this means there are going to be a lot of parts (and this
>isn't even the most complicated model) with their bounding boxes. I thought I
>had tried everything, also experimented with bounding boxes with no effect. 
>However, after sending the message, I thought I'd try it once again and put the
>whole object in one single bounding box. This way the largest part of the
>background is rendered much faster. I had tried this before but didn't know how
>large a box I should take so to be safe I used a large bounding box. Far too
>large, so the effect was nil. Now it occured to me that the site of the sheet
>you start with can be used to get a tight(er) fitting bounding box. It renders 3
>times faster now, which still is rather slow. So if there's anything else I've
>missed I'd like to know.
>
>I didn't understand the suggestion about the intersection for the background.
>
>Regards,
>
>Remco

-- 
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure

Post a reply to this message