> At the left is an ordinary smoothed height_field, at the right the same
> shape using smooth_triangles.

I'm surprised the left result is so bad. But how did you make the right one?
Probably the difference is that more normals are averaged.

But you see, I'm really *fighting* with a macro to calc normals to a
triangle heightfield.. It's crazy, I code as "clean" as I can, and week
after week I return to my code to find the bugs, but ...argh... I know how
to calculate the normal of a triangle, but my macro construct the
heightfield in a (better) way that means, sometimes there are 3, 4, 5 or 6
faces connected to a vertex.

Any help will be appriciated!  It's a macro that I think would be generally
useful to many people.

Regards,
Hugo

Post a reply to this message