On Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:58:37 -0700, "Harold Baize"
<bai### [at] itsaucsfedu> wrote:

>Problem...
>There is a "cross-hatch" artifact where two of
>the sphere_sweep bars cross. The red and green
>ones. Anyone know why?

Other have given you some good answers on how this is caused. If it
were me, I'd simply move the different lines slightly closer to, or
farther from the camera, to put them on slightly different planes.
That should cure this "fight for dominance"issue.

However, I might be even more concerned that some of your 3-D type is
very hard to read.



Later,
Glen

7no### [at] ezwvcom     (Remove the numeral "7")

Post a reply to this message

Glen Berry wrote:
> 
> However, I might be even more concerned that some of your 3-D type is
> very hard to read.

This is my opinion, too. A conventional 2D diagram and - if you insist - 
a 3D background would be easier to read. Apart from this, the information
is missing what the left and the right bars signify.

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Sir Charles W. Shults III" <aic### [at] cflrrcom> wrote in message
news:3d054634$1@news.povray.org...
>     You are using cylindrical bars, pretty obviously.  This "artifact"
also
> shows up in the red/yellow crossing.  Ask yourself a question- what shape
is
> generated by the merging of two cylinders that are nearly parallel?  That
is
> your answer.

Following what Sir Charles said, this is what two solid cylinders
intersecting look like.

-tgq

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'TestIt.JPG' (44 KB)

Preview of image 'TestIt.JPG'

Yeah, it is not finished, just experimenting. The 3D titles and
legends work better when viewed stereoscopically. Of course
none of that contributes to clarity of communicating data.
It is just for fun. Sometimes I wish the data that I work
with could benefit from a three dimensional representation.

HB

"Thomas Willhalm" <tho### [at] uni-konstanzde> wrote in message
news:3d05d97e@news.povray.org...
> Glen Berry wrote:
> >
> > However, I might be even more concerned that some of your 3-D type is
> > very hard to read.
>
> This is my opinion, too. A conventional 2D diagram and - if you insist -
> a 3D background would be easier to read. Apart from this, the information
> is missing what the left and the right bars signify.
>
> Thomas

Post a reply to this message

Yeah, now i recognize that I just expected it to
behave differently. Expected a smoother transition.

HB

"TinCanMan" <Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:3d05e374@news.povray.org...
>
> "Sir Charles W. Shults III" <aic### [at] cflrrcom> wrote in message
> news:3d054634$1@news.povray.org...
> >     You are using cylindrical bars, pretty obviously.  This "artifact"
> also
> > shows up in the red/yellow crossing.  Ask yourself a question- what
shape
> is
> > generated by the merging of two cylinders that are nearly parallel?
That
> is
> > your answer.
>
> Following what Sir Charles said, this is what two solid cylinders
> intersecting look like.
>
> -tgq
>

Post a reply to this message

"Harold Baize" <bai### [at] itsaucsfedu> wrote in message
news:3d061681@news.povray.org...
> Yeah, it is not finished, just experimenting. The 3D titles and
> legends work better when viewed stereoscopically. Of course
> none of that contributes to clarity of communicating data.
> It is just for fun. Sometimes I wish the data that I work
> with could benefit from a three dimensional representation.

I suggest reducing the extrusion depth to a readable level.

-tgq

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 10 Jun 2002 16:58:37 -0700, Harold Baize wrote:
> 
> Hello friends.
> I'm playing with POV-Ray as a rendering tool for
> SPSS. This is a chart looking at change in mental
> health scores for children by ethnicity. The slope
> lines are drawn with sphere_sweeps.
> Problem...
> There is a "cross-hatch" artifact where two of
> the sphere_sweep bars cross. The red and green
> ones. Anyone know why?

Don't use cylinders/sphere sweeps, sharp edged rectangles, then you'll
get a merged colour at the intersections, just round the ends off with 
a macro or something.  And like others said make the text flatter. 

-- 
sphere{z*5,1pigment{rgb.5}finish{reflection.3specular.5}}box{<-50,-3,-50>
<50,-2,50>pigment{checker/*\__\\__/  * \_\\__*/scale 2}finish{ambient.7}}
light_source/*__\\__\\__\\__\\__\(    ~ )\__\\__\\__\\__\\*/{<2,5,1>*4,1} 
/*\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\__\~  -/__\\__\\__\\__\\__\\*//* Steve */

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 11 Jun 2002 12:20:23 -0400, "TinCanMan"
<Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:


>I suggest reducing the extrusion depth to a readable level.

You could also try making the sides of the extrusions a different
color than the faces. That would make it much easier to read the face
of the type, without sacrificing the 3-D look.



Later,
Glen

7no### [at] ezwvcom     (Remove the numeral "7")

Post a reply to this message

Harold Baize wrote:

> Yeah, it is not finished, just experimenting. The 3D titles and
> legends work better when viewed stereoscopically. Of course
> none of that contributes to clarity of communicating data.
> It is just for fun. 

That's good to hear. It sounded like you wanted to include it in
your next paper or presentation.

> Sometimes I wish the data that I work
> with could benefit from a three dimensional representation.

Unfortunately, a feature-rich image is much harder to grasp,
but makes much more fun to create...

Thomas

Post a reply to this message

"Harold Baize" <bai### [at] itsaucsfedu> wrote in message
news:3d0616cb$1@news.povray.org...
> Yeah, now i recognize that I just expected it to
> behave differently. Expected a smoother transition.
>
> HB

You could use blobs to make a smoother transition.

Corey

--
schitzo.y0ru.net

blob{threshold#macro _(s,i,g)#if(s)sphere{20*(i-<5,1,-10>)16,1pigment
{rgb 9}}_(s-1i+g,g)#end#end.7_(4x,x)_(2,0y)_(5y*2x)_(5x*6x)_(3<6,
1>2*x)_(2<6,2>4*x)}

Post a reply to this message