> Vincent Le Chevalier wrote:
>> The implementation here is quite slow because it uses many function
>>  calls.
> 
> Whoah. I'm inclined to call it slow, considering it took 1m 36s just
> to parse!

O:-)
OK, maybe I should have said 'very slow' then :-)
Back when I was playing with that I chose to use a height field built at
parse time, because when used in an isosurface... It's even slower. At
least after parsing the render goes quick.

> Upon closer inspection of the rendered image, I see that it shares 
> similar "step" artifacts as can be found with the blended cells 
> implementation, albeit yours are much less pronounced.

Yep, I saw those too.
I think that what we see here are discontinuities in the second
derivative, i.e. the slope is perfectly continuous but we can still see
that its rate of variation is not. The glossy finish also makes those
stand out.

Well, either that, or my implementation is wrong because the first
derivative *should* be continuous ;-)

Is there the same kind of effects with Megapov's interpolate 3 ?

Best

-- 
Vincent

Post a reply to this message