"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> "GioSeregni" <gms### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>
> > 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
>
> Using a transparent texture like that is very clever! However, it actually
> *removes* the offending triangles... that is, it makes them invisible (if that
> matters.) I had to test it to see. You might want to examine your renders to see
> if that happened.
>
> The attached image is my height_field again; close-ups are on the right side:
> A-- the artifacts
> B-- with    interior_texture{pigment{rgbt 1}}.  The artifact triangles are
> missing (invisible).
> C-- with    interior_texture{-- same as exterior--}
> but with   finish{--ambient or emission value--} to try to match it.
> The triangles are visible.
>
> The scheme of using the same interior_texture as the outer one still looks
> better, to my eyes.
>
> [code taken from your image]
> object{GO
> interior_texture{pigment{rgb...}...
> texture{pigment{image_map{gif "transp_GIF".gif...  [or  pigment{rgbt 1} ]
>
> Although this scheme might appear to work for your model, it has a  problem: The
> interior_texture is the 'real' one, but it does not respond to the usual
> 'exterior' lighting in a scene because it is actually on the INSIDE  surface of
> the mesh. Only ambient or emission in its finish{...} is of any use, which does
> not look very good-- at least for  my own height_field.

Unfortunately I noticed that my system still has artifacts that I didn't see.
However, I noticed that in my test models they are less evident because those on
the edges of the shape generally disappear (which I believe are faces tangential
to the vector starting from the point of view). I haven't tried playing with f
and t yet... I'll try tomorrow. Now I'm importing colors from STL to bring them
grouped onto distinct meshes
Thx!
G.

Post a reply to this message