"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht 
news:web.4857977d34131bc7731f01d10@news.povray.org...
>
> Those macros were more complete, and would successfully convert any 
> isosurface.
> My macros will only work properly if the centre-point and inner shape
> combination can 'see' the entire outer surface. However, for my purposes 
> (as
> mentioned previously, boulders, bricks and other simple building shapes), 
> I
> think this technique does produce better meshes more quickly.

Yes, I shall have to revisit the Tor Olav Kristensen version of those macros 
and apply them again to these same isosurfaces to see if this time, I can do 
better, and if the results are "better" than with your macros.  :-)
>
> It's interesting to see the macros applied in this way - I never intended 
> them
> to be used for complete landscapes. I think better results would be 
> obtained
> for outcrops, boulders or other discrete objects that can be automatically
> placed, as a supplement to heightfields or regular isosurfaces.

Well, you know how it goes! People always want to apply things to other 
features, just to see if they work. :-)   I agree with you however that it 
would probably be better to stay within the given boundaries... but 
experimenting is too tempting.

>
> Encouraging though!

It really is, and so possibilities are increased.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message