Gilles Tran wrote:

> Heightfields are surely faster in the case of  flat objects. I rendered the previous
> picture with a height field instead of an isosurface and it rendered 5 times faster
for
> an identical output (no need to post it !).
> Their main problem is that they are not tileable (unless you make copies of them and
> stitch them together) while an isosurface can be of any size.

 And they consume much more memory, and have a finite resolution, while
isosurfaces can have infinite resolution (with precedural displacement).
 Happily, both exists !  Twice the fun !

Fabien.

Post a reply to this message