On Sat, 06 Mar 1999 20:45:34 -0500, Stephen Lavedas
<swl### [at] virginiaedu> wrote:

>I'd be happy to work with you on it.  Actually I have a few ideas.. the
>first being to add a "culling" keyword (ie you know there is a mirror
>somewhere, so you need all the hair) or perhaps to give the vector to
>the mirror and calculate off of both.  The other is to add a margin to
>the occlusion formula.  Don't occlude EXACTLY at the point where the
>point is no longer visible..occlude 5 degrees further or some such.

>
>Steve
>(of course I still need to dl the super patch)
>
>
>Margus Ramst wrote:
>> 
>> Vahur Krouverk wrote in message <36E19E92.E46E008F@fv.aetec.ee>...
>> >
>> >Super!
>> 

>> 
>> >Suggestion: use "back-hair culling" - don't create those fur hairs,
>> >which are not seen. I don't know, whether this is done already and how
>> >hard is to do this, but it may provide more hair for camera direction.
>> 
>> It should be possible and potentially very useful. Right now I see 2
>> problems:
>> 1) reflections may show bald ares;
>> 2) you should see some hairs sprouting from areas that are outside the
>> camera's FOV (esp. with long hairs);
>> 
>> How to deal with these, I don't know. Suggestions?
>> 
>> Margus

The paper "Computing the antipenumbra of an area light source" by Seth
Teller may be useful here.  Consider the mirror, etc as the area
light.  The paper is at:
http://www-graphics.stanford.edu/papers/antipenumbra

Jerry Anning
clem "at" dhol "dot" com

Post a reply to this message