JRG wrote:
> 
> L'Harmonieux Forgeron wrote:
> > The container is: a sphere, a box, a rotated box and a cone.
> > My solution is a new object(*) which has intersections only
> > with rays whose direction is same as the normal of the surface.
> 
> You lost me here. 

Please excuse the bad explanation.

>By *direction* you don't mean the exact direction of the
> normals, do you? You mean something like: if (vdot (ray_vector,normal) > 0)
> then intersection occurs?

Yes, Exactly.

> From your examples it looks so. Simplifying, a
> nexus would be an object of which you can only see the _interior_.

Well, the inversed nexus just appears like the normal object.
It's just a very strange experimental object.
Applied to a  plane, the plane exist when going one way but not the other!
It also have a side effect on light source, because, unless using no_shadow,
the light_source outside the nexus do not get access to inside the nexus, and
vice-versa!


> 
> > Any interest ?
> 
> Truly, I don't really know. At a first glance it doesn't look that
> intuitive, so I can't judge. Of course it would allow to see through a box,
> but... I don't really know. 

> Not always a container has no depth. 

You lost me here.  

> With CSG
> containers with some depth (for example the difference of two boxes) a nexus
> would be of no help.

I was just thinking about your example: making a box out of 6 planes, whose
only one of them would be a nexus and the other 5 still be normal planes.
Or even stranger, drilling a hole with CSG difference in the container and 
adding a nexus just like a magic windows to close the container again.


-- 
Non Sine Numine
http://grimbert.cjb.net/

Post a reply to this message