 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hello,
Have you ever felt that the standard scaling is not what you need? I was
thinking about that and it occurred to me that it could be interesting to
be able to grow or shrink an object not relative to the origin (as with the
standard scaling) but perpendicularly to its surface. Does this have any
sense? It would be equivalent for some simple shapes: sphere, cube... but
for others it would be like changing the threshold value (for blobs), or
altering the minor radius (for tori)...
I know this is more than probably not easy (impossible?) to do, and maybe
it's not interesting at all, but well, I lose nothing by writing it here :)
Regards
--
Linux User #289967 (counter.li.org)
PGP Pub Key ID: 0x01A95F99 (pgp.escomplinux.org)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think the way POV-Ray works does not make
this possible. Perhaps using functions, or Horman's
isoCSG, but I'm not too sure about that. After all, you
are talking about a double step: find the surface, get
the normal, and then move surface in opposite direction
to normal...
This may work very easy with meshes, but not with
mathematical solutions, and especially not a jumbled
mess of them (which a union/merge normally is)...
--
Tim Nikias
Homepage: http://www.digitaltwilight.de/no_lights/index.html
Email: Tim### [at] gmx de
"Jellby" <jel### [at] M-yahoocom> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3dfce408@news.povray.org...
> Hello,
>
> Have you ever felt that the standard scaling is not what you need? I was
> thinking about that and it occurred to me that it could be interesting to
> be able to grow or shrink an object not relative to the origin (as with
the
> standard scaling) but perpendicularly to its surface. Does this have any
> sense? It would be equivalent for some simple shapes: sphere, cube... but
> for others it would be like changing the threshold value (for blobs), or
> altering the minor radius (for tori)...
>
> I know this is more than probably not easy (impossible?) to do, and maybe
> it's not interesting at all, but well, I lose nothing by writing it here
:)
>
> Regards
>
> --
> Linux User #289967 (counter.li.org)
> PGP Pub Key ID: 0x01A95F99 (pgp.escomplinux.org)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Have you ever felt that the standard scaling is not what you need? I was
> thinking about that and it occurred to me that it could be interesting to
> be able to grow or shrink an object not relative to the origin (as with
the
> standard scaling) but perpendicularly to its surface. Does this have any
> sense? It would be equivalent for some simple shapes: sphere, cube... but
> for others it would be like changing the threshold value (for blobs), or
> altering the minor radius (for tori)...
It's been thought of before, and while possible with some shapes, it's very
difficult (and analytically impossible for certain shapes).
Mega-POV's "proximity pattern" did this, I think.
- Slime
[ http://www.slimeland.com/ ]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3dfd0c76@news.povray.org>, "Slime" <slm### [at] slimelandcom>
wrote:
> Mega-POV's "proximity pattern" did this, I think.
Sort of: the proximity pattern used the average or minimum distance to
the surface. Theoretically, this could be used in an isosurface to do
this "inflate" effect, but the original pattern was almost unuseably
slow in textures (on computers of that time), as an isosurface function
it would be extremely slow. I'm working on an updated version that has
optimized object-specific proximity methods in addition to the
ray-sampling method.
--
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: chr### [at] tagpovrayorg
http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Greg M Johnson
Subject: Re: Another kind of scaling or "growing"
Date: 16 Dec 2002 08:20:48
Message: <3dfdd330@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Write your own macro to do this using the trace function.
This confusing double-set of coordinates made use of CorelDream3D a
confusing waste of time...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Le Forgeron
Subject: Re: Another kind of scaling or "growing"
Date: 17 Dec 2002 11:37:25
Message: <3DFF52DD.9060003@free.fr>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jellby wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Have you ever felt that the standard scaling is not what you need? I was
> thinking about that and it occurred to me that it could be interesting to
> be able to grow or shrink an object not relative to the origin (as with the
> standard scaling) but perpendicularly to its surface. Does this have any
> sense? It would be equivalent for some simple shapes: sphere, cube... but
> for others it would be like changing the threshold value (for blobs), or
> altering the minor radius (for tori)...
>
> I know this is more than probably not easy (impossible?) to do, and maybe
> it's not interesting at all, but well, I lose nothing by writing it here :)
It's been done already (as a patch of 3.1) for mesh,
see http://jgrimbert.free.fr/pov/patch/tessel/index.html#displace
It works better with smoothed mesh, because otherwise the
displacement/growth along the normal create a lot of holes in the mesh
(but that can be a desired effect...)
Given the way Pov works, your idea is only possible with mesh and
mesh-compatible objects.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
OK, thanks for the replies.
I understand it's difficult/impossible to implement in POV, and I didn't
intend to suggest that, I was just trying to start a conversation about it
:)
I guess meshes (and macros) would be the way to go for this. How hard would
be to take into account the possible spliting of the object? It's been a
long time since I last made anything in POV, and I don't have much time
now, so this is just a "thought experiment".
--
Linux User #289967 (counter.li.org)
PGP Pub Key ID: 0x01A95F99 (pgp.escomplinux.org)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
