> Yes, this is an problem with current leafs "implementation", thay are made 
> as height-fiels, looking from front leaf is :
 > ...

I understand that, and that was one of the reasons why I proposed to
use triangulations. Another was that it might be faster as I use
only a few hundred triangles to get a reasonably accurate shape.
By the way I am now working on a butterfly with control over the
angle of the wings. Another thing I can not do with hightfields
because the wings would expand with increasing angle.
(If you mail me the image of a leaf I can convert it for you
and you can compare the results. If you are reading the news:
on a system that hides my e-mail adress, it is a_linnenbank
in the hotmail domain which I only use for junk but will read
it more frequently in the coming days).

>>None of the leaves have stalks. I assume that is a result of the way
>>you generate them.
> 
> 
> Stalks means "talis" ? Yes, I will probably do them separetly as i.e. 
> cylinder (or sphere sweep/spline)
>  
What language is 'talis'? And yes, from your answer I infer that
that is what I meant. Cylinders are not realistic enough and
sphere sweeps are, in my experience, slow. I would say: go for
bicubic patches.

	Andrel

Post a reply to this message