> But isn't the isosurface shape itself always "constrained by" the box or
> sphere CONTAINER that always has to accompany it? I admit I've only done a
> few isosurface tests , but this container object *seems* to limit an
> isosurface shape to being either "box-like" or "sphere-like." Am I wrong
> about that? Is there actually a way around that limitation, to get much
> more complex shapes and geometry?


Usually you just make the container bigger than the object before doing
weird transformations to it. As long as the object doesn't *rely* on the
container object for its shape, this isn't a problem. This is the case for
most isosurface functions, especially those made with IsoCSG.

 - Slime
 [ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]

Post a reply to this message