"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> After more work, I decided against using that macro fix, as it really wasn't
> needed (the problem was better solved outside the macro.) Instead, there seems
> to be *something* basically weird, having to do with how functions 'see'
> image_maps (as opposed to how they deal with pigments/patterns); I even have
> questions now about functions supposedly "evaluating the pattern on the X/Y
> plane". Trying to sort it all out is rather complex and mind-numbing--but I'm
> getting *closer* to an answer!

Make sure you're not messing up these two in your experiments:

    function { pattern { MyPattern } }
    function 20, 20 { pattern { MyPattern } }

They do totally different things. The former lets you use patterns where POV
would expect a function, by merely providing a wrapper; the latter lets you use
patterns where POV would expect an image, by actually sampling a slice of the
pattern in advance.

The former is officially called a "pattern function"; the latter is called a
"function image" or "internal bitmap"

Post a reply to this message