|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Chris Huff wrote:
>
> I just added it to my code, and realized it takes a pigment, not a
> pattern...why is that? It kind of messes up my logic for the name...it
> should be "blurred_pigment_pattern". ;-)
> I think my first modification will be to change it to use a
> pattern...that might speed it up slightly. I can't think of any benefit
> to using a pigment...
It can be declared, furthermore: just laziness.
> So the value tends toward 0 as the object gets nearer, and the effect of
> an object gets stronger with distance? That doesn't seem right...an
> object should have less influence with distance.
>
Probably better the other way round, in both patterns. The idea in the
object pattern was shadow -> 0, but that's not that important.
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmx de>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |