Larry Hudson <org### [at] yahoocom> wrote:

> The color_map is an entirely different thing from the coordinate axes.
> It's merely a one-dimensional *DEFINITION* of the color data.  You seem
> to be trying to 'force' this color definition dirctly onto the
> coordinate dimensions, but it's really a totally different thing.

Yes, I see that, both conceptually and from the POV definition.  But it's
the PATTERN that turns this one-dimensional "thing" into actual 3D
spatial colors, no?  It seems to me that a "color_map without a pattern" is
like a race horse without legs... simply a concept. That is, for any real
usefulness, 3D pattern and color_map are inextricably interwoven (which is
how I usually think of them.) That being the case, in what axis or axes can
I expect  to see the visual results of FREQUENCY at work on the color_map?
I guess that's my basic question AND conceptual difficulty.  I suppose the
answer depends on the pattern specified(?)

SCALE, by contrast, seems to have a very straightforward, clear and
understandable effect on the color_map and pattern simultaneously.
>
> Scaling, however, IS directly related to the coordinate dimensions, and
> as Alain pointed out, the scaling can be different along all three axes.

Didn't mean to lead everyone down a wrong path.
In my use of SCALE, I'm simply substituting it for FREQUENCY (in the same
location in the code), without any extra <x,y,z> modifiers.  Straight
scaling of all axes equally, in other words.

Ken

Post a reply to this message