In article <3a585d21$1@news.povray.org>, "Rune" 
<run### [at] inamecom> wrote:

> I completely agree. That is a good syntax. I think everything else than
> SLOPE_VECTOR should be optional, but I'm sure that's what you meant too.

Exactly...you can leave off the whole altitude portion, or just the 
LOW/HIGH portions of either altitude or slope. Maybe even make the slope 
vector itself optional, many people would otherwise just be using "slope 
{y}" all the time, it would be nice if they could just say "slope".


> (You don't specify LOW_SLOPE without specifying HIGH_SLOPE too though, and
> similar with LOW_ALT and HIGH_ALT.)

Actually, you would have to make a special effort to enforce that, and I 
see no reason to do so...it would be easier to make them all optional.


> The point type is something I've often wanted myself. Interesting 
> effects could be achieved setting the point to the location of a 
> light_source or the camera.

Or for things like putting soot on the sides of a cage surrounding a 
flame, paint on objects surrounding a very messy accident, etc.


> BTW, what do you think of the clipping suggestions I had?

About the way it repeats when outside the [0, 1] range? Sounds good to 
me, but there may be a better solution. Maybe a combination of the 
simple slope pattern, a way to specify the clipping/scaling for 
individual patterns, and combining patterns together with function 
patterns(or with the pigment_pattern).

-- 
Christopher James Huff
Personal: chr### [at] maccom, http://homepage.mac.com/chrishuff/
TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg, http://tag.povray.org/

<><

Post a reply to this message