Ron Parker schrieb in Nachricht ...
[...]
>From: par### [at] my-dejanewscom (Ron Parker)
>Newsgroups:   povray.windows
>Subject: Re: Local Transformations
>Message-ID: <36962501.0@news.povray.org>
>Date: 8 Jan 1999 10:32:17 -0500
>Xref: news.povray.org povray.windows:2401
>


Very interesting (that "Who is Thorsten Froehlich"-part was great :-)).

[...]
>That doesn't make sense.  Where is a box?  Where is a complex mesh object?
>Where is an isosurface that simulates an asteroid field?  Where is
>union {sphere{0,1} sphere {20,1}}?  (I think you'll find that this is
covered
>in more detail in the other thread, too.)


You are of course right and I get the point. But if you would define any
point related to the object  (say
<(maxx-minx)/2,(maxy-miny)/2,(maxz-minz)/2>) and return this if the function
Whereis{Object} is called, it would make some thinks easier (not much, but
sometimes it may help).

You could achieve this with the megapov-keywords min_extend and max_extend,
if I get this right. How accurate are the bounding boxes of the 'primitive'
pov-primitives like spheres, boxes, cones, cylinders? Is the object
'centered' in there. I know this is not a accurate term, 'course where is
the center? What I mean is: would min_extend.x and max_extend.x return -1
and 1 for a sphere{0,1}, a box{-1,1}, a cone {<-1,0,0>,1,<1,0,0>,2}?

I'm just curios, hope I do not annoy anyone :-)

Marc-Hendrik

Post a reply to this message