 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I thought there was a function called hf_at that lets you make the highest
part of the HF what you want. eg: hf_at 10 I'm not quite sure.
Mick Hazelgrove wrote:
> Is there a way of finding the highest parts of a hf. I don't just want
> everything above a certain height but the top of every bump. Hope this is
> clear.
>
> Hope someone can help.
>
> Mick
--
Samuel Benge
E-Mail: STB### [at] aol com
Visit my isosurface tutorial at http://members.aol.com/stbenge
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"SamuelT" <STB### [at] aolcom> wrote in message news:395F875B.D2218AA9@aol.com...
| I thought there was a function called hf_at that lets you make the highest
| part of the HF what you want. eg: hf_at 10 I'm not quite sure.
Nope, that's a poor man's 'trace()'. 'hf_height_at' returns just the y coord
of the hf cubical (only the starting, untransformed hf) from 0*x, 0*z to x, z.
Bob
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christoph Hormann wrote:
>
> HF-Lab contains a function for something quite similar, namely filling up local
> minima, source code (in C) can be found at:
>
I am aware of the function ("fillbasin" or something?), but IIRC it requires
several passes and takes a while to compute even in HF-Lab. Probably not
practical in POV script.
However, you could let HF-Lab itself to do the hard work for you: have the fill
function go over your HF a few times, then use the resultant HF (having fewer
local maxima) with the method I suggested.
In fact, even this might be unnecessary: I think HF-lab can find the first and
second derivatives of HF data, so it should be possible to create a filter
script to find and "mark" the local maxima. Perhaps I'll look into it in a day
or two - or perhaps it is best left to someone who actually knows something
about maths ;)
--
Margus Ramst
Personal e-mail: mar### [at] peakeduee
TAG (Team Assistance Group) e-mail: mar### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bob Hughes wrote:
>
> Nope, that's a poor man's 'trace()'. 'hf_height_at' returns just the y coord
> of the hf cubical (only the starting, untransformed hf) from 0*x, 0*z to x, z.
>
Hf_height_at should be sufficient in this case, although I must say I have never
used it myself.
--
Margus Ramst
Personal e-mail: mar### [at] peakeduee
TAG (Team Assistance Group) e-mail: mar### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Margus Ramst wrote:
>
[...]
> In fact, even this might be unnecessary: I think HF-lab can find the first and
> second derivatives of HF data, so it should be possible to create a filter
> script to find and "mark" the local maxima. Perhaps I'll look into it in a day
> or two - or perhaps it is best left to someone who actually knows something
> about maths ;)
>
I am right now working on a program that generates such masks in a flexible
manner (see http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/atg_02.jpg for a first
screenshot). I am busy with other things and it is a quite large program, so it
won't get finished in the next days, but don't give up hope :-)
Christoph
--
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
Homepage: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
