"Christoph Hormann" <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote in message 
news:dmp4nm$jk9$1@chho.imagico.de...
> Warp wrote:
> >   Nobody has made a decent patch for it and there has not been 
enough
> > popular demand.
> > 
> >   Note that mipmapping will not work correctly with reflection and
> > refraction from curved surfaces.
> 
> And non-perspective cameras and shadows and non-linearly transformed 
> (warped) images and all uses of images outside textures.

shadows of transparent image_maps you mean?
ok, so don't use mipmapping in those cases.  After some google'ing, I 
noticed that you seem to have something almost irrational against the 
implementation of mipmapping.  OK, it won't work in all cases, but it 
will work in some very frequently used case, which (imho) makes it very 
interesting and worth implementing.
 
> It is fair to say the concept of mip-mapping is essentially 
incompatible 
> with raytracing although with a lot of work it could be possible to 
> bridge this incompatibility of course.

I disagree.  I would say: it's fair to say the concept of mip-mapping is 
essentially incompatible with some aspects of raytracing.
 
> >   OTOH, mipmapping can only add to the quality of the rendering.
> > It will most probably not make any image look worse than what 
POV-Ray
> > currently generates (when using image maps).
> 
> It will look worse in all cases the algorithm chooses a lower 
resolution 
> map than it should.

then one has to make sure the algorithm doesn't choose a lower 
resolution map than it should, and of course make it optionally.

cu!
-- 
#macro G(b,e)b+(e-b)*C/50#end#macro _(b,e,k,l)#local C=0;#while(C<50)
sphere{G(b,e)+3*z.1pigment{rgb G(k,l)}finish{ambient 1}}#local C=C+1;
#end#end _(y-x,y,x,x+y)_(y,-x-y,x+y,y)_(-x-y,-y,y,y+z)_(-y,y,y+z,x+y)
_(0x+y.5+y/2x)_(0x-y.5+y/2x)            // ZK http://www.povplace.com

Post a reply to this message