I was wondering what might happen depending on texture location in the script.
For example inside the 'difference' only, or in both objects only.
If you got it fixed no need to try that.  I came across something like this once
and that seemed to be the problem.

Bob

"GrimDude" <gri### [at] netfreecom> wrote in message
news:38801915@news.povray.org...
> Well, so far I've come across more then 2000 lucky coincidences. :)
>
> I worked alright. Everytime too. I know, I was warned my Ron Parker (and
> Chris Colefax, too, who both recommended clipping years ago I think), that
> it wasn't proper coding and shouldn't work. But, it did, so I continued the
> practice. The worst part is, after I got all of the independant portions
> coded I merged it with the overall code, so now I have a real mess!
>
> Ah, well! Clipping (w/wo inverse) fixes it.
>
> --
> GrimDude
> gri### [at] isonet
>
>

Post a reply to this message

No, I don't apply textures, etc., until after I have the section defined. :)
--
GrimDude
gri### [at] isonet
omniVERSE <inv### [at] aolcom> wrote in message
news:38803a63@news.povray.org...
> Is there a texture (pigment at least) on the differencing object (box in
this
> case)?  Reason I ask is that I had a similar sounding situation a couple
years
> ago.
>
> Bob
>
> "GrimDude" <gri### [at] netfreecom> wrote in message
> news:38801b38@news.povray.org...
> > The same extraneous portion shows up, but with the disected section
rather
> > then the
> > host.
> >
>
>
>

Post a reply to this message