"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlnet> wrote in message 
news:42cf7c4b@news.povray.org...
>
> "Henry" <use_the_feedback_form@site> schreef in bericht
> news:42cd5a64$1@news.povray.org...
>> New improved versions of both plugins are out now.  Many of the problems
> are
>> fixed.  I went ahead and converted everything to use spinners, since
> that's
>> all anyone can seem to figure out.  I went a step further and had the
>> spinner update the text label.  Seems to work fine.
>>
>
> Excellent, Henry! ...and almost perfect!
> What I would like now, are the platonic objects to be oriented *correctly*
> in their most basic shape, i.e. with subdivision 0. So, the octahedron 
> would
> be balanced on its point, the cube and tetrahedron on one of their faces,
> etc. like in the example small images.
> Would that be possible?
>
> Thomas
>

Very possible.  It looks like the tetrahedron and icosahedron are the only 
ones that are on edge.  I suppose the tetrahedron should rest on a face and 
the icosahedron should balance on a point.  I would just need to re-orient 
the coordinates.  Luckily, this is easy to do because Moray can convert the 
object to mesh in any orientation.

I'm actually toying with yet another idea...  The shapes use the mesh2 
format, which fits nicely into UDO.  What I am thinking is allowing for the 
tessellation of a UDO object.  The only problem with that idea is Moray will 
crash when I exceed the size of the vertex array.  Thus I would need to 
re-declare the arrays as dynamic.  Also, there is the the potential problem 
of people supplying incompatible shapes.  I don't even want to know what 
would happen if somebody tried to tessellate chess.udo.

Henry

Post a reply to this message