Martin Magnusson <martin@-xx-blecket-xx-.org> wrote:
> How about using smooth_triangles instead? In the example you showed, it
> looks like you used "flat" triangles. That should make them look
> smoother, and probably better, at close range.

This is very true. However, I can't immediately see a way of generating the
normals which wouldn't take an order of magnitude more work on my part!

The example mesh was intentionally low-res for illustrative purposes. In
practice, I think it would be much easier simply to increase the resolution
of the mesh until the triangles disappear. For really close-range shots, you
wouldn't need many bricks. For long-range shots, lower-res bricks would do
fine (the bricks in the wall shown above have the same res as the single
brick, for example). For a mixture, you'd want to alter the resolution
according to distance from the camera. All of this can be aided further by
using copies picked from small arrays of pre-declared meshes to save
memory.

Luckily, mesh resolution is one of the parameters in my macro!

Bill

Post a reply to this message