"Christopher James Huff" <cja### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in message
news:cja### [at] netplexaussieorg...
> In article <3f8ad0f5$1@news.povray.org>,
>  "Scott Gammans" <dee### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
>
> It doesn't create a hole, the surface is still there, it is just
> transparent. This technique is a sometimes-useful hack, but does not
> have any actual effect on the geometry of the object.

Well yes, my choice of words was poor. I realize that there isn't an actual
CSG operation performed, but the effect to the viewer is essentially the
same: you now have a transparent area in the shape of the transparent area
in your image map.

> > The amount of
> > memory used jumped considerably, of course, but the average rendering
time
> > between the 1000x1000 and 4000x4000 image maps was essentially
unchanged. Is
> > that about right?
>
> It will be slightly slower due to more memory being accessed, but
> probably not by enough to reliably measure. Unless you run out of RAM
> and start swapping...

Which is what I'm seeing. Thank you very much for taking the time to
respond!

Post a reply to this message