MichaelJF <fri### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> Am 27.05.2022 um 07:48 schrieb And:
> > MichaelJF <fri### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> >> Am 26.05.2022 um 11:27 schrieb And:
> >>> MichaelJF <fri### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> >>>> Simply, I could not resist;)
> >>>>
> >>>> isosurface {
> >>>>       function { f_result2(x,y) }
> >>>>       contained_by { sphere { <0,0,0>,5 } }
> >>>>       threshold 0.75
> >>>>       max_gradient 1000
> >>>>       pigment { color Cyan }
> >>>>
> >>>>       rotate <60,0,0>
> >>>>       scale 5
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Since the functions given by And are constant in direction z, with an
> >>>> isosurface the container will limit the functions in this direction. So,
> >>>> I thought a sphere would look better than a box as container.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards
> >>>> Michael
> >>>
> >>> This looks still planar mapping.
> >>>
> >> Sorry, but I have no idea, what "planar mapping" could mean.
> >>
> >> Best regards
> >> Michael
> >
> >
> > I mean it is not a spherical wrapping
> >
> I can not understand your complaints. I put your two dimensional setting
> into an (three dimensional) isosurface, only. Nothing more. Where is the
> problem?
>
> Best regards,
> Michael

Oh, it's no problem.

Post a reply to this message