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] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other 
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message