Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:

> Ah! yes. Economy of means.



> That is true.  Firstly because the manual
> element is removed and then also because the paradigm is of replication
> through model building. If you leave detail out of the model it doesn't
> seem like a "suggestion" to the viewer, it just seems like a crude
> model.  The exceptions make for an interesting side discussion though*.
>     I think one place these concepts come into play is in texturing and
> expecially with texturing * resolution.  The pixel plays a role in
> whether the texture can suggested, or handled more explicitly.  Also I
> suppose, in how much detail is necessary in a model.


Yes and lighting. For a series of images I made a while ago. I used a high
ambient, no shadows and flat lighting to give an unrealistic or cartoon
effect.

>
> *Just to get it said, in mesh modelling there is a strong tendency to
> economy of means, further bolstered by the psuedo-pragmatic ideal of
> models animating well.  And notice that in mesh modelling the manual
> role is restored to a degree.

Yes as much as in CSG I would think. What is wrong with using as little as
you can get away with?



Those changes to your chalice are spot on, BTW. All you need now is some
wine and wafers :-)

Post a reply to this message