"Greg M. Johnson" <gre### [at] my-dejanewscom> wrote in message
news:39802CA6.469A2F0F@my-dejanews.com...
| Wonderful. How many objects are we seeing--I'd be even more impressed if
it
| were only one!
|
| Also, doesn't this just blow away the concept of heightfields--wouldn't it
| be impossible to make a non-hideous flythrough if these were mere
| heightfields and one lacked a Cray?

You're right on the mark with that comment Greg.  The circumventing of a
need for smooth height fields to do this sort of thing may make the HF
obsolete, dare I say.  The one drawback is the need to get a fine enough
'accuracy' apparently, among other things I might not know about, which can
slow things up.  The 'eval' and 'method 2' are superb additions.
Oh, yeah.  Yes, just the isosurface with ridged multifractal function and a
water plane, some ground fog, sky_sphere too.  A little detailed info:  24
by 24 unit square isosurface used with the camera traveling about 3 units at
a height of 0.41*y average above the water level.

Bob

Post a reply to this message