|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hello,
on playing with isosurfaces I managed to create a spiral spring, but
rendering took quite some time. So my idea was to replace the containing box
by a tube, i.e. a difference of two cylinders.Of course, it didn't work, and
re-reading the manual taught me that boxes and spheres are the only possible
isosurface containers.
Now my questions are: Does anybody know if additional containers are planned
in future releases? Can I expect a considerable reduction of rendering time
if I reduce the container size as far as possible (without cutting the
isosurface)?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Martin Oswald wrote:
> Hello,
>
> on playing with isosurfaces I managed to create a spiral spring, but
> rendering took quite some time. So my idea was to replace the containing box
> by a tube, i.e. a difference of two cylinders.Of course, it didn't work, and
> re-reading the manual taught me that boxes and spheres are the only possible
> isosurface containers.
In fact the contained_by{} statement does not parse a shape, the fact
that the syntax is identical to the box and sphere shape is pure
coincidence.
> Now my questions are: Does anybody know if additional containers are planned
> in future releases?
There is no such feature planned.
> Can I expect a considerable reduction of rendering time
> if I reduce the container size as far as possible (without cutting the
> isosurface)?
As written in the docs the container should be as tight as possible for
minimum render time.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 11 Jan. 2004 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
If Isosurfaces where using complex shapes as containers, it wouldn't be
as efficient, because the intersection tests that are supposed to save
you a lot of function evalutations would take a lot of time.
Instead of a tube, you should try to fine tune the appropriate long box
which would contain it.
But anyway, isosurfaces take a lot of time ... unfortunately
JC
PS: If anyone has a Pentium X 54GHz for selling, I'd take it. :-)
Martin Oswald wrote:
> Hello,
>
> on playing with isosurfaces I managed to create a spiral spring, but
> rendering took quite some time. So my idea was to replace the containing box
> by a tube, i.e. a difference of two cylinders.Of course, it didn't work, and
> re-reading the manual taught me that boxes and spheres are the only possible
> isosurface containers.
> Now my questions are: Does anybody know if additional containers are planned
> in future releases? Can I expect a considerable reduction of rendering time
> if I reduce the container size as far as possible (without cutting the
> isosurface)?
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|