|
 |
In article <o1fq6uk3k4bmuu1kqeqd0mmpgu976nlg45@4ax.com>,
W?odzimierz ABX Skiba <abx### [at] babilon org> wrote:
> Well, I have an idea around this problem. In the truth it's even feature
> request. What about changing definition of Inside method of objects ?
> I mean if it could return not only yes/no to describe object but variable
> float value to describe distance (not in units) to surface just like
> isosurface does. So positive value means outside, zero means surface, negative
> means inside.
This is what I've been doing for the updated proximity pattern/glow
patch. (which is on hold until POV 3.5 is complete)
However, it would be a very bad idea to replace the Inside() method with
this, as it would often take much longer to compute proximity than to
figure out inside/outsideness...I just added a new proximity method.
(two actually...one for proximity of a point, another for proximity of a
ray)
--
Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
POV-Ray TAG e-mail: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
TAG web site: http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002 13:14:46 -0500, Christopher James Huff <chr### [at] maccom>
wrote:
> However, it would be a very bad idea to replace the Inside() method with
> this, as it would often take much longer to compute proximity than to
> figure out inside/outsideness...
But I imagine yes/no inside is calculated with real flot and then "booleaned"
with condition. Look at Inside_Plane, Inside_Sphere. Also Inside_Glyph look
complicated enough to think it somehow calculates distance :-)
But of course you can be right. I don't know internal behaviour of all
Inside() methods.
ABX
Post a reply to this message
|
|
