Chris Huff <chr### [at] yahoocom> writes:

> In article <qqm### [at] schlattfmiuni-konstanzde>, Thomas 
> Willhalm <tho### [at] willhalmde> wrote:
> 
> > IMHO it would be more "clean" to introduce a way to invert a 
> > transformation.
> > As far as I know, the inverse matrix is already calculated internally.
> > (The struct TRANSFORM has the two members "matrix" and "inverse".) 
> > So, the implementation should be easy.
> > 
> > Then you would get the desired effect like this:
> > 
> > #declare Trans = transform { translate .. rotate .... }
> > #declare InvTrans = transform { invert_transform Trans }
> > object { ... texture { ... transform{InvTrans} } transform {Trans} }
> 
> While I agree that something like this would be useful(as a matter of 
> fact, I have been considering it for my next project), 

:-)

> I don't see how 
> it helps in pretextured objects. If your example is used, you don't even 
> need inverse_transform, you could write it like this:

You're right. Perhaps I should use more pretextured objects, since I didn't
really understand the problem...

Thomas

-- 
http://thomas.willhalm.de/ (includes pgp key)

Post a reply to this message