Op 5-7-2021 om 13:09 schreef Bald Eagle:
> Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
>> What is missing is the internal structure of minerals,
>> especially in the ears. I am pondering the problem
> 
> Yeah - it's the old "POV-Ray renders _surfaces_ not volumes" problem/trap that i
> fall into from time to time.
> 
>> and think into the direction of a media,
> 
> I think that might lead to an unintentional detour: the pursuit of a PhD in
> media
> 
>> or maybe, a special kind of isosurface (I am thinking of my rings of Saturn in
2017),
> 
> That has potential, as if it were done right, you'd have a lot of separate
> surfaces, but then you'd have spaces in between - no idea if that would be
> problematic or not.  You'd also have to match up the texture with the isosurface
> domains.
> 
>> or again, a rand_in_object fill with small particles.
> 
> That would be super tricky and take for-ever.
> Exposure of the set of points for crackle to SDL, allowing for "one-pass"
> placement of "particles" would be what we'd need, and I can still see that as
> being "slow" - but probably acceptable to achieve such a difficult effect.
> 
> Sam Benge used Voro++, and I'm wondering if maybe there might be an external
> library that could generate a Voronoi subdivision of a volume.  Though I don't
> like that idea very much.
> 
> I've taken several looks at the source code for generating the crackle pattern
> over the years, and it's long, somewhat complicated, and would be a project on
> its own to convert to SDL.
> 
> I'm in favor of the isosurface idea, as it seems to be the fastest, most
> reliable, and most direct approach.
> 
I'll ponder a bit more. I have couple of other things/ideas to address 
presently.

> RL has me running around doing non-POV-Ray stuff (Damn you, RL!) so I just have
> less time than usual...   :(
> 

Yeah... Often not possible to avoid.

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message