Makes a person wonder if a negative strength sort of thing could be applied 
which would only affect surfaces external to the parent/sub group.
As in the interaction of a finger into a palm of a hand both made of separate 
blob parent objects.
Just thought everyone might like to dream along with.
Actually there is kind of a way of doing this already.
Two identical blob groups; one positive, other negative strength. The two 
don't interact with each other but the surface to deform interactively needs 
to be a part of the positive strength blob group, the negative strength blob 
group would need to be minus that "touched" surface.

Message <363### [at] BEGONEVILESPAMMERSacmorg>, Darius Davis  typed...
>
>Mike wrote:
>> I've been wanting to do this for a long time, really!
>> 
>> Consider this (can your code handle this?):
>> 
>> #declare Blob1 =
>> blob {
>> threshold .3
>> sphere {<0, 0, 0>, 1, 1}
>> pigment {color White}
>> }
>> 
>> #declare Blob2 =
>> blob {
>> threshold .3
>> sphere {<0, 0, -1>, 1, 1}
>> pigment {color Blue}
>> }
>> 
>> blob {
>> blob {Blob1 translate 1*clock*y}
>> blob {Blob2 rotate 30*clock*y}
>> }
>
>In a word, yes.  I can't see anything there that would cause a problem. 
>The translates and rotates on sub-blobs all work OK, I've tested this
>extensively.
> 
>> Now imagine if you built a bunch of parts for a human using blobs and 
declared
>> each one, then incorporated each part into another one.  You could move the
>> parts to make the character walk and talk ect.
>
>The only problem is that each sub-blob component interacts with *every*
>other...  it's not possible to limit the interactions between
>components, even if the components are within different 'sub-blobs' - at
>least, it's not possible in any way I can see :)  So, if you move two
>blobbed hands together, they'll interact in the same way that blobs
>normally do if they both have the same ultimate 'parent' blob.  I've
>thought long and hard about this and I can't think of any way to prevent
>it.  (But I'm not going to stop thinking about it yet... ;)
>
>> I think it'll be great.
>
>Well, I've already had some great fun with it!  I think it's great, and
>it'd be my personal pleasure to share it with all!
>
>Cheers,
>
>Darius Davis

-- 
 omniVERSE: beyond the universe
  http://members.aol.com/inversez/POVring.html
=Bob

Post a reply to this message

In article <363### [at] BEGONEVILESPAMMERSacmorg>, Darius Davis
<Dar### [at] BEGONEVILESPAMMERSacmorg> wrote:
>The only problem is that each sub-blob component interacts with *every*
>other...  it's not possible to limit the interactions between
>components, even if the components are within different 'sub-blobs' - at
>least, it's not possible in any way I can see :)  So, if you move two
>blobbed hands together, they'll interact in the same way that blobs
>normally do if they both have the same ultimate 'parent' blob.  I've
>thought long and hard about this and I can't think of any way to prevent
>it.  (But I'm not going to stop thinking about it yet... ;)

Would it be possible and reasonable to assign 'groups' to blob components,
and then specify which groups can interact (or perhaps more appropriately,
cannot interact) with which other groups?

So that groups 'left arm' and 'right arm' can interact with only the
'shoulder' group. 'Shoulder' can interact with only the 'neck' group,
'left arm' group, 'right arm' group, and 'chest' group. Etc.

The 'bullet' group can interact with any group except for the 'thick
skull' group...

Jerry
jer### [at] hoboescom   
http://www.hoboes.com/jerry/                   e-mail hel### [at] hoboescom
What Your Children Are Doing: http://www.hoboes.com/html/NetLife/Children/

Post a reply to this message