Orchid Win7 v1 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> On 06/07/2015 10:57 PM, Samuel Benge wrote:
> > Le_Forgeron<lef### [at] freefr>  wrote:
> >> ahem...
> >>
> >> The described distance fields are exactly povray isosurface :
> >
> > So why do POV's isosurfaces render with so many artifacts? Take a simple sphere
> > function. Should turn out almost flawless, but it doesn't! POV's isosurfaces
> > look all sliced up, even with an ideal max_gradient. Lower accuracy values only

> > raymarching code I've used looks a lot better. Why?
>
> I have literally no idea what you're talking about. Are you using a
> different release version to me or something? I have no problems here.

3.7 official.

The attached shows artifacts present at various accuracies for the function
sqrt(x*x+y*y+z*z)-1. max_gradient set to 100 for all spheres, which is more than
enough.

The first might look acceptable... but just try adding a pattern displacement,
and it'll become obvious that the accuracy is set too high.

I'd say that earlier versions simply had a high default accuracy or something,
but I remember getting sharp results along with fewer artifacts. IDK. I brought
it up a long time ago, and for a response I got crickets chirping. Oh well, it
was never enough to keep me from using POV-Ray :)

BTW, about that C++ compiling stuff I was going on about yesterday... I was
*mostly* joking. While I /have/ found myself compiling/recompiling SFML for
hours on end while making modifications to its source, there's no way I could be
replied upon to do such things as an occupation. My abilities in that field
exist within a very narrow range. Not sure what you do exactly, but I'm willing
to bet that if I had your job, I'd be as bald as Yoda due to all the hair
pulling, and much less wise :/

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'isospheres.png' (73 KB)

Preview of image 'isospheres.png'