> It would be useful to find the intersection with the object in the
> ordinary way and then trace backward (or forward) from the intersection
> point until the ray hits the "closest isosurface".  I don't know if that
> is what you've done here, but it looks like it is similar.

Yes, this very much like what I was thinking when I started out. One of the
problems with it though is with rays that get close to the surface, but
miss. If you're disturbing the surface much there is a chance that the ray
should have actually hit something (as with the crackle distortion sample
image). Unless you're calculating proximities along the length of the ray,
it won't know it was supposed to have hit anything.

Does this make sense? I can probably explain it better.

- Jeff
jef### [at] twilightfaircom

Post a reply to this message