"Tim Nikias" <tim### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:3CEC3A25.46062591@gmx.de...
> I think he was referring to the amount of reflection, as
> reflection .4 or even in version 3.5 reflection{.2,.7} would
> be something far different from 100% mirror-like reflection...
>
> AFAIK it is not possible to return those, unless you use
> trace on objects, of which you have set the reflection inside
> an array. A macro could trace the object, check the reflection
> in the array, and return intersection point, surface normal, and
> reflection value.
>

Yeah, that makes more sense upon re-reading. <DOH!> Thanks for setting me
straight.

Let me see if I follow you correctly here; you might not need an array for a
single simple object with an explicit reflection value set in the texture, but
an array would be handy for a union/merge object and/or complex texture mapped
objects right?  If so, how might you get the values for variable reflection,
and/or the interpolated values within a pigment_pattern or image_pattern? The
eval_pigment() function in functions.inc ?

Batronyx ^"^

Post a reply to this message