 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I wanted to make a pipe bend that goes through 90degrees. At first I looked
for a 'sweep along path' contruct, but it doesn't appear that there is one,
but since this will follow a circular path I figured that the rotational
sweep would work. However it seem that it only does 360 dgree rotations
with no option for a partial circle. Anyway to make a long story short, I
ended up using a CSG of a Torus with two Cubes subtracted from it. So my
question would be, is there an easier way?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mmmmmmmmm
IMHO an intersection between your torus and a single box should be lighter
and faster.
Marc
3e01c9ff$1@news.povray.org...
> I wanted to make a pipe bend that goes through 90degrees. At first I
looked
> for a 'sweep along path' contruct, but it doesn't appear that there is
one,
> but since this will follow a circular path I figured that the rotational
> sweep would work. However it seem that it only does 360 dgree rotations
> with no option for a partial circle. Anyway to make a long story short, I
> ended up using a CSG of a Torus with two Cubes subtracted from it. So my
> question would be, is there an easier way?
>
>
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
D'oh! Of course I should have seen this. It is so obvious now that you
mention it. LOL. I feel rather foolish, but that is nothing new. ;-)
Thank you very much for the reply.
"Marc Jacquier" <jac### [at] wanadoo fr> wrote in message
news:3e01cb20@news.povray.org...
> Mmmmmmmmm
> IMHO an intersection between your torus and a single box should be lighter
> and faster.
> Marc
>
> 3e01c9ff$1@news.povray.org...
> > I wanted to make a pipe bend that goes through 90degrees. At first I
> looked
> > for a 'sweep along path' contruct, but it doesn't appear that there is
> one,
> > but since this will follow a circular path I figured that the rotational
> > sweep would work. However it seem that it only does 360 dgree rotations
> > with no option for a partial circle. Anyway to make a long story short,
I
> > ended up using a CSG of a Torus with two Cubes subtracted from it. So
my
> > question would be, is there an easier way?
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
3e01e377@news.povray.org...
> D'oh! Of course I should have seen this. It is so obvious now that you
> mention it. LOL. I feel rather foolish, but that is nothing new. ;-)
Lol, don't worry, I made worse. :-)
Anyway try when possible to replace differences by intersections, it's
faster for POV: bounding boxes are smaller I think.
>
> Thank you very much for the reply.
Nothing :-)
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Marc Jacquier <jac### [at] wanadoofr> wrote:
> Anyway try when possible to replace differences by intersections, it's
> faster for POV: bounding boxes are smaller I think.
Internally both intersections and differences are converted to the
same CSG entity. It's not about which keyword you use, but how large
your objects are (and how many are there).
--
#macro N(D)#if(D>99)cylinder{M()#local D=div(D,104);M().5,2pigment{rgb M()}}
N(D)#end#end#macro M()<mod(D,13)-6mod(div(D,13)8)-3,10>#end blob{
N(11117333955)N(4254934330)N(3900569407)N(7382340)N(3358)N(970)}// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
