"Christopher James Huff" <cja### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in message
news:cja### [at] netplexaussieorg...
> In article <3f2152fa$1@news.povray.org>,
>  "Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote:
>
> > Can you elaborate? How/why is a bounded object still visible even when
the
> > bounding object does not intersect with it? I can think of a couple of
> > possibilities, but in each case I can think of a reason why it wouldn't
work
> > if the code was logical FMHPOV*.
>
> The code only cares about whether or not the bounding object was hit,
> not about the distance of the hit. If, from the camera's point of view,
> the bounding shape covers the image area of the object, the object will
> be visible. It doesn't care if the bounding shape is actually in front
> or behind the object. However, from the point of view of a light source
> in the same scene, the bounding shape is nowhere near its object, so it
> just doesn't see the object.

Ah yes, such is raytracing. I wasn't even thinking about that aspect, only
the physical cutting away or containment of objects acting on other objects.
Maybe that's about what Tom could be saying to himself now, too.  :-)

Bob H.

Post a reply to this message