"Christopher James Huff" <cja### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in message
news:cja### [at] netplexaussieorg...
>
> The code only cares about whether or not the bounding object was hit,
> not about the distance of the hit. If, from the camera's point of view,
> the bounding shape covers the image area of the object, the object will
> be visible. It doesn't care if the bounding shape is actually in front
> or behind the object. However, from the point of view of a light source
> in the same scene, the bounding shape is nowhere near its object, so it
> just doesn't see the object.
>

This was one of the possibilities I considered, but I couldn't work out why this
was efficient.

Doesn't it imply that more tests will have to be done than if the ray was only
checked for intersections with the object when the ray was inside the container?

Hmm, looking at that last sentence, I'm beginning to suspect that the notion of
"more tests" if fundementally flawed.

Post a reply to this message