On Sat, 24 Jul 1999 12:36:50 -0400, Nathan Kopp wrote:
>
>Ben Birdsey wrote:
>> 
>>         But let me toss in another suggestion that might short-circuit the critics
AND
>> keep the speed advantage.  Let's compute the mesh and use it as a bounding
>> surface (i.e. we are 99.5% sure that the isosurface totally inside this mesh).
>> And, you could just render the mesh for test renders.  This will totally reduce
>> the number wasted calculations, and keep the beauty of the isosurfaces at al
>> resolutions!
>
>A very interesting idea!  You could bound with a lower resolution mesh if
>you use a slightly higher potential threshold.

  f(x,y,z) = x^2+y^2+z^2-1
  g(x,y,z) = 1-x^2-y^2-z^2

Both f and g are spheres.  Both have unit radius if you use a threshold of 
zero.  If you use a higher threshold, f gets larger while g gets smaller.

Post a reply to this message