Bob Hughes <per### [at] aolcom?subject=pov-news:> wrote:
: Oh dang it, I forgot that was said before too.  I had lowered the accuracy
: quite a bit to only 0.001 from the 0.0001 I had used before.  Although,
: seemed to me I had seen those jaggies even at 0.000001.  Just how small a
: decimal is accuracy supposed to get to before being virtually infinite?  :-)
: Had to check again, and yep, even at 0.00000001 I could see jaggies at the
: plane/iso boundary.  Considerably smoother than at 0.001 but still obviously
: shows the difficulty there is in tracing that boundary.

  'accuracy' is not the only thing that affects the quality of the calculation.
Also 'max_gradient' and 'method' may have something to do with it.

: Hm, what about the 'contained_by' objects?  That have the same trouble?

  The object specified in the 'contained_by' block is just the same as
the regular primitive, and thus mathematically correct.
  You should always specify the smallest 'contained_by' object possible
(which of course contains the volume you want to see from the isosurface).
It helps the accuracy. (For example if your isosurface is a sphere of
radius 1, don't make a container object of radius 100 but of radius 1).

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):_;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message