Sorry about that, I know it's isosurface too, maybe I wasn't paying
attention to the spell checz feat yours.

I agree the spheres would be tough, especially if you 'pack' them properly.
To do the first 'layer' wouldn't be too bad, I think, but to 'see' through
the spheres and not get overlapping ones would be tough.  Not sure what the
theoretical optimal packing would be.

I was really thinking of some kind of isosurface that looked 'granular'
(small grains) that might be easier and wouldn't look too bad.

                  == John ==

"Christopher James Huff" <chr### [at] maccom> wrote in message
news:chr### [at] netplexaussieorg...
> In article <3d4edb72@news.povray.org>,
>  "John D. Gwinner" <jgw### [at] dazsicom> wrote:
...
> > An ISO surface might be easier.
>
> Just a pet peeve of mine, but the word is "isosurface". The "iso"
> fragment is not an acronym of anything.
> Anyway, an isosurface would probably be very difficult or impossible to
> use for this, a lot of spheres would be better, especially with multiple
> textures. Calculating the positions of the spheres would be tough
> though. Not impossible, but you would probably want to use an external
> program to generate the spheres.

Post a reply to this message