POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.newusers : isosurface container Server Time
5 Nov 2024 09:26:21 EST (-0500)
  isosurface container (Message 1 to 3 of 3)  
From: Martin Oswald
Subject: isosurface container
Date: 29 Jan 2004 08:18:50
Message: <4019083a@news.povray.org>
Hello,

on playing with isosurfaces I managed to create a spiral spring, but
rendering took quite some time. So my idea was to replace the containing box
by a tube, i.e. a difference of two cylinders.Of course, it didn't work, and
re-reading the manual taught me that boxes and spheres are the only possible
isosurface containers.
Now my questions are: Does anybody know if additional containers are planned
in future releases? Can I expect a considerable reduction of rendering time
if I reduce the container size as far as possible (without cutting the
isosurface)?


Post a reply to this message

From: Christoph Hormann
Subject: Re: isosurface container
Date: 29 Jan 2004 12:10:03
Message: <jarne1-fr7.ln1@triton.imagico.de>
Martin Oswald wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> on playing with isosurfaces I managed to create a spiral spring, but
> rendering took quite some time. So my idea was to replace the containing box
> by a tube, i.e. a difference of two cylinders.Of course, it didn't work, and
> re-reading the manual taught me that boxes and spheres are the only possible
> isosurface containers.

In fact the contained_by{} statement does not parse a shape, the fact 
that the syntax is identical to the box and sphere shape is pure 
coincidence.

> Now my questions are: Does anybody know if additional containers are planned
> in future releases? 

There is no such feature planned.

> Can I expect a considerable reduction of rendering time
> if I reduce the container size as far as possible (without cutting the
> isosurface)?

As written in the docs the container should be as tight as possible for 
minimum render time.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 11 Jan. 2004 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______


Post a reply to this message

From: JC (Exether)
Subject: Re: isosurface container
Date: 31 Jan 2004 04:35:24
Message: <401b76dc$1@news.povray.org>
If Isosurfaces where using complex shapes as containers, it wouldn't be 
as efficient, because the intersection tests that are supposed to save 
you a lot of function evalutations would take a lot of time.
Instead of a tube, you should try to fine tune the appropriate long box 
which would contain it.

But anyway, isosurfaces take a lot of time ... unfortunately

JC
PS: If anyone has a Pentium X  54GHz for selling, I'd take it. :-)

Martin Oswald wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> on playing with isosurfaces I managed to create a spiral spring, but
> rendering took quite some time. So my idea was to replace the containing box
> by a tube, i.e. a difference of two cylinders.Of course, it didn't work, and
> re-reading the manual taught me that boxes and spheres are the only possible
> isosurface containers.
> Now my questions are: Does anybody know if additional containers are planned
> in future releases? Can I expect a considerable reduction of rendering time
> if I reduce the container size as far as possible (without cutting the
> isosurface)?
> 
>


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.