"Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamdeckingdealscouk> wrote in message
news:opr95d41q8efp2ch@news.povray.org...
> And lo on Thu, 24 Jun 2004 14:32:50 -0400, Ross <rli### [at] everestkcnet>
> did spake, saying:
>
> > "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamdeckingdealscouk> wrote in message
> > news:opr93snpswefp2ch@news.povray.org...
> >
> > :snip:
> >
> >>
> >> Uses boxes rather than points and might be slow with a *lot* of data
> >> (this
> >> took 26 sec on my computer, 76800 objects) but I hope it helps.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Phil Cook
> >>
> >> --
> >> All thoughts and comments are my own unless otherwise stated and I am
> >> happy to be proven wrong.
> >
> >
> > couldn't you use a bicubic_patch object, assuming each line in the data
> > file
> > is a point in 3d space?
>
> I wasn't keen on the fact that the control-point doesn't necessarily
> represent the actual point co-ords and that as a bicubic patch it only
> allows 16 vector points which means dividing the data file into 4x4 'sets'
> <0,0,Y>,<4,0,Y> to <4,0,Y,>, <4,4,Y> etc. and then recreating the patch
> with the correct data 'set' each time. Of course you have to assume the
> data is divisible by 16 or pad it. I must admit with the code here I
> assumed it was square, but that's easily changed.
>
> It seemed to fiddly to do with a bicubic patch, though of course if you
> care to try I'd be interested in seeing your code :)
>
> --
> Phil Cook
>

i was mostly just curious, as i tend to not use bicubic patches. Ah well.

Post a reply to this message