Christopher James Huff wrote:
> 
> [some more explanations]

Well, it looks like a good start.  Illustrate it with some images, some
diagrams and formulas of the falloff functions, some render times for
comparison, a syntax summary and you already have a quite helpful addition
for the user.

> Isosurfaces: the main advantage is that it is faster. It uses
> optimizations that can't be done in even a hard-coded isosurface
> function. For example, it collects the components that influence a ray,
> and uses only those when searching for the intersection. If you have a
> blob2 with hundreds of components, but only two components affect the
> current intersection being tested, only those two components will get
> evaluated.

Well, in functions you could do the same on a point basis instead of ray
basis and add some caching if the next point is near the old one.  Surely
it will be slower but as i said having it in isosurfaces would also have
some serious advantages.

Note that handcoded isosurface functions for blobbing or CSGing many
components scale extremely badly, even if an internal function for this
would not be as fast as your new shape it would be ways faster than the
manual approach.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 17 Jun. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message