"Florian Brucker" <tor### [at] torfboldcom> wrote in message
news:4289163d$1@news.povray.org...
> > The idea is interesting, though. I wonder if it would work better
> > implemented in code than SDL.
> I guess it's somewhat unnecessary with heightfields. Unless you got a
> *very* detailed one, I doubt the effect will be very noticeable.

Yes, but it was supposed to be for *very* detailed height_fields :)
I just rendered a low-resolution radial height_field to more clearly show what
it is :)

> It
> would be really nice with isosurfaces (wasn't there anyone doing some
> stuff in that direction?) and with terrain generators or things like
> that. IIRC it's a standard feature for meshes in most commercial packages.

But most commercial packages use scanline-rendering, where the speed is
proportional to the amount of polygons in the scene.  With raytracing, it's
different.  The main factor is the image resolution, not the scene-detail.
Extremely detailed scenes will render faster with raytracing than with scanline
rendering.  So I really wonder if a LOD-system for height_fields has any use :-/

cu!
--
camera{location-z*3}#macro G(b,e)b+(e-b)*(C/50)#end#macro L(b,e,k,l)#local C=0
;#while(C<50)sphere{G(b,e),.1pigment{rgb G(k,l)}finish{ambient 1}}#local C=C+1
;#end#end L(y-x,y,x,x+y)L(y,-x-y,x+y,y)L(-x-y,-y,y,y+z)L(-y,y,y+z,x+y)L(0,x+y,
<.5,1,.5>,x)L(0,x-y,<.5,1,.5>,x)                 // ZK http://www.povplace.com

Post a reply to this message