>  That doesn't change the fact that the CAD software tesselates the surface
> before rendering it.

That was nothing to do with my point though, my point was that CAD software 
creates rounds without tesselating first.

Post a reply to this message

Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Reactor <rea### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> > I agree for the general case, but it wouldn't be a bad or difficult thing to
> > have a new keyword that would allow for beveling and rounding the edges of a
> > few specific primitives.
>
>   The problem is that the usability of that would be very limited. It
> wouldn't help rounding edges of CSG constructs, for example.

Warp, I wish you hadn't said that, as I spent many minutes trying to picture a
macro that would allow for rounded differences between boxes.  As it turns out,
that would actually be very simple, so I started thinking about differences
between boxes, spheres, cones, cylinders, and tori.  I think it could be done,
but I don't think I'd want to do it.



That doesn't mean I won't try, though.  As for intersections, that might be a
bit beyond me right now.


-Reactor

Post a reply to this message