 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 23:12:44 -0400, "Quadhall" <tre### [at] ww-interlink net> wrote:
>
>#declare scaler=(3^.5)/2;
>#declare checko=function{x+abs(y)*scaler}
>#declare final_function=function{checko}
>
In your code the abs function should include scaler. With a bit of trial and error I
came up
with the following which works;
#declare scaler=(3^.5)/3;
#declare checko=function{x+abs(y*scaler)}
Rendering this results in a nasty where the two isos join on the x-axis. This is an
old
problem (not related to isos) and can be worked around by a small rotation. i.e.
union {
object{looper}
object{looper rotate <0,0,120>}
object{looper rotate <0,0,-120>}
rotate z
}
I leave it to the mathematically unchallenged to explain it all :-)
David
----------------------
dav### [at] hamiltonitecom
http://hamiltonite.com/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
David Wilkinson wrote in message
>In your code the abs function should include scaler. With a bit of trial
and error I came up
>with the following which works;
>
>#declare scaler=(3^.5)/3;
>#declare checko=function{x+abs(y*scaler)}
>
Yep, I realized after I had posted the message that I put the m in the
equation y=mx+b on the wrong side.....oops. I also, for some inexplicable
reason did not remove the two from the #declare of scaler.
should have put
#declare scaler=(3^.5);
#declare checko=function{x*scaler+abs(y)}
but thanks for the info, especially the bit about the need for a z rotation
Quadhall
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 1 May 2001 00:48:52 -0400, "Quadhall" <tre### [at] ww-interlinknet> wrote:
>
>but thanks for the info, especially the bit about the need for a z rotation
>
Actually, a small z rotation is only one solution. All that is necessary is to ensure
that the
camera doesn't line up with joint (on the yz plane.) Adding 0.01 to the camera y
location
also avoids the problem.
David
----------------------
dav### [at] hamiltonitecom
http://hamiltonite.com/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Why, thanks again!
Quadhall
David Wilkinson wrote in message ...
>On Tue, 1 May 2001 00:48:52 -0400, "Quadhall" <tre### [at] ww-interlinknet>
wrote:
>
>>
>>but thanks for the info, especially the bit about the need for a z
rotation
>>
>Actually, a small z rotation is only one solution. All that is necessary is
to ensure that the
>camera doesn't line up with joint (on the yz plane.) Adding 0.01 to the
camera y location
>also avoids the problem.
>David
>----------------------
>dav### [at] hamiltonitecom
>http://hamiltonite.com/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
