>> Is this the intended behavior? (If so, could anyone explain it to me?)
>> Have others noticed that too, or am I doing something wrong?
>> Is this a bug that will eventually be fixed, or can I rely on my
>> "workaround" remaining valid?
> 
> I do not know what you base your observations on, but they are incorrect.
> POV-Ray does not behave the way to describe it.  Function images are created
> by evaluating the function exactly as specified in the user manual.

Well, the manual doesn't specify very much. The only thing that it
specifies that is contrary to my observation is "The image is taken from
the square region <0,0,0>, <1,1,0>", and this isn't a very accurate
specification either.

Here is the scene used and some images:

  http://n.ethz.ch/student/walthec/functionhf/

o It is clearly visible that the kinks in the height field coincide with
the edges of the checker texture, so one can count that the height field
has 11 vertices along each direction, while it is defined by "function 12,
12 {".

o Thanks to the "(N-1)/(N-2)-y" used in the function (what I refer to as
"workaround"), the height field shows the desired result, namely that the
gauss functions have their peaks exactly on a vertex. This wouldn't be the
case if I had used "TheFunc(x, 0, y)" (or "TheFunc(x, 0, 1-y)").

 -Christian

Post a reply to this message