"GioSeregni" <gms### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> "GioSeregni" <gms### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > "Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> > > "GioSeregni" <gms### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > > > "Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > And if you DO see red there, then try moving the camera around, and viewing
it
> > > > > from different angles - because it may just disappear and pop up in
different
> > > > > areas.
> > > >
> > > > It seems that they always arise on the
> > > > perimeter of the volumes (in positions tangential to the cone of vision)...
> > >
> > > Yes, that is where those artifacts sometimes appear on a smooth-triangle object.
> > > I think it also depends on the lighting angle, and maybe even the size of the
> > > triangles.
> > >
> > > What you are seeing is a known effect of raytracing the smooth normals when they
> > > are viewed at that raking angle. (I thought that there was a short technical
> > > explanation of this in the documentation, but I cannot find it.) The camera is
> > > picking up the unlighted (black) interior of the object.
> > >
> > > If I make a low-rez height_field and add the 'smooth' keyword, the same thing
> > > happens. The interior_texture trick is one way to try and make these artifacts
> > > less noticable. Or try adding the 'double_illuminate' keyword to the object. If
> > > I recall, this was a recommended 'fix' for the problem. It seems to work most of
> > > the time, but not in every situation.
> >
> > Ok, thank! I am working on .. it does not seems by light position, but by the
> > angle between WP and smooth_triangle (s) ...
> > Many thanks again!
> > G.
> Bug hacked?
> old sprites concept? I'm under no illusions, I'll do more tests, but in this way
> I don't see the bug anymore


WOW!
right no trick
left the concept ... SHAPE-in-out XOR SWAPSHAPE-out-in

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'clipboard01.png' (198 KB)

Preview of image 'clipboard01.png'