"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>
> >
> > The results are actually quite accurate for "large flat 'mathematical'
> > slabs", if that's the shape you intend to model. The problem isn't the
> > presence of edges /per se/ -- the problem is the presence of edges in
> > places where you want to pretend that there are none.
> >
>
> Ah yes, I see now. Thanks.
>
> From reading lots of newgroup comments over the years, I had come to the
> (mistaken) impression that SSLT actually *worked* better on complex, CURVED
> objects-- meaning, an object with LOTS of small triangles and their attendent
> interpolated normals. (Such objects do show a nicer, more complex 'look' from
> the SSLT effect-- like the ears on the Stanford Bunny.) And conversely, that
> more-or-less 'flat-surfaced' featureless objects were to be avoided. But I
> understand more clearly now that SSLT *works* equally well on simpler shapes--
> like a superellipsoid 'bar of soap', for example. It's just that the final
> effect isn't as visually complex (leading me to the mistaken conclusion that it
> didn't work well on such shapes.)


Indeed, what we are all saying about SSLT, is that it's actually *too* accurate
and looks (too?) great !... :-) We are not used to that behaviour from other
renderers especially with the smoothed average normal cheat  enabled.
I am hoping a normal overhaul will also bring many other goodies to POV (such as
tangeant space (/parallax) normal mapping if we don't forget :-P )
meanwhile, I would love to have a fast biased cheated sstl simulated effect
shipped along under the subsurface/translucency command with a keyword similar
to the (fake photonless) caustics. A result similar to ST Benge fastprox macro
would be enough.

Post a reply to this message