One more, 'til I dream up a new option.
spheroid(1.4, 0.0, 0.2, 0.2, 10, 16)

Regards,
aQ

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'segment3.png' (301 KB)

Preview of image 'segment3.png'

Its Like I put on this mask and couldnt be stopped. Somebody Stop me.

No wait, someone made that movie already.

Can't stop playing with it.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'segment5.png' (268 KB)

Preview of image 'segment5.png'

"Mike the Elder" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

> ..... I suppose I should do one now ;-)
>
> Best Regards,
> Mike C.

Yes you should!

Academic question:

While your on it, ponder if all points can connect 6 edges, as opposed to what
segment3.png shows; points connecting 5, 6, and 7 edges.

Wondering if mathematical magic can do it, or if my design depends on limited
num stacks/slices, or if it is even possible. Seems a structural weakness and
design flaw where 7 edges connect with adjacent 5-edge connections.

aQ

Post a reply to this message

alphaQuad napsal(a):
> "Mike the Elder" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> 
>> ..... I suppose I should do one now ;-)
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Mike C.
> 
> Yes you should!
> 
> Academic question:
> 
> While your on it, ponder if all points can connect 6 edges, as opposed to what
> segment3.png shows; points connecting 5, 6, and 7 edges.
> 
> Wondering if mathematical magic can do it, or if my design depends on limited
> num stacks/slices, or if it is even possible. Seems a structural weakness and
> design flaw where 7 edges connect with adjacent 5-edge connections.
> 
> aQ
> 
no. You need vertices (points) of order 5. Assuming you only want to use 
vertices of order 5 and 6, you need 12 5-order vertices as in the 
icosahedron, or 6 4-order vertices, or 4 3-order vertices.
It follows from the Euler's characteristic:
	V+F=E+2
V-number of vertices
F-number of faces
E-number of edges
2-euler's characteristic of the sphere
if we assume no double edges(diangular faces) we can write E >= 3/2 F.
establishing F <= 2/3 E into the previous formula we get:
V + 2/3 E >= E + 2
V - 2 >= 1/3 E
6V - 12 >= 2 E
If you definitely want no 5-order vertices you can still use toroidal 
domes (V+F=E+0) instead of spherical ones. or you can use partial spheres.
-- 
You know you've been raytracing too long when...
you ever saw a beautiful scenerey and regretted not to take your 6" 
reflective ball and a digital camera, thinking "this would have been a 
perfect light probe"
-Johnny D

Post a reply to this message

Jan Dvorak <jan### [at] centrumcz> wrote:

> if we assume no double edges(diangular faces)

.... or triple.

previous code patch:

stripfaces()

#while (h < n1+n2-1)
#while (h < n1+n2-1)

#if (n1 > 1) Edge_Arr[NumEdges] = <s1,e2>; ...
#if (n2 > 1) Edge_Arr[NumEdges] = <s2,e1>; ...
replaces
//#if (NumEdges < NumVertices*4)
//#if (NumEdges < NumVertices*4)

for last edge, where range1==1 or range2==1 then done, no quad left to disect

Some known method can check accuracy:
320:Verts == 636:Triangles == 954:Edges == 16:Stacks/32:Slices

so now
#declare Edge_Arr=array[NumVertices*3]
should always be enough
Versus:
#declare Edge_Arr=array[NumVertices*4]

(I was over 972-954 edges)

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'segment6.png' (437 KB)

Preview of image 'segment6.png'

finished the UV Norm and Face arrays for a mesh2 surface.

I'll post the rest if anyone is interested.

320:Verts = 954:Edges = 634:faces if all calcs are right now.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'egg2.jpg' (246 KB)

Preview of image 'egg2.jpg'

"alphaQuad" <alp### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> "Mike the Elder" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> > ..... I suppose I should do one now ;-)
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Mike C.
>
> Yes you should!
>
OK... Here it is:

nEGGxt?

(Admission of guilt: Only the egg is new, the
setting is a recycle from an old IRTC entry.)

Best Regards,
Mike C.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'eggsistencialism.jpg' (217 KB)

Preview of image 'eggsistencialism.jpg'

"Mike the Elder" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> "alphaQuad" <alp### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> > "Mike the Elder" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> >
> > > ..... I suppose I should do one now ;-)
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Mike C.
> >
> > Yes you should!
> >
> OK... Here it is:
>
> nEGGxt?
>
> (Admission of guilt: Only the egg is new, the
> setting is a recycle from an old IRTC entry.)
>
> Best Regards,
> Mike C.

OK, no more watchin' the temporal sync video, clearly you've been tracing too
long to need it, its was for more challenged people I suppose.

I keep laughing at how freeking good the BG is. And the egg well, keep trying.

I am kidding of course. But seriously how about colored patterns projecting thru
(or from) your egg and onto that pristine x-rated BG.

Just an impulsive caprice
aQ

Post a reply to this message

Put this one on that platform, would look great.

this one shows I finally got all the faces. triangle{}

missed 2 faces with mesh2{} and didnt even notice.

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'egg3b.png' (414 KB)

Preview of image 'egg3b.png'

10x18=112verts  (180/(pi/2)) 114.59156
= 220 faces
= 330 edges

verts*2-4
verts*3-6

16x32=320           (512/(pi/2)) 325.94932
= 636
= 954
also = v2-4 v3-6

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'egg3c.png' (447 KB)

Preview of image 'egg3c.png'