Thomas de Groot <tho### [at] degrootorg> wrote:
> Op 27/05/2022 om 19:32 schreef MichaelJF:
> > 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 {





> >>>>>


> >>>>> }
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 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
>
> I think And means that the pattern remains oriented to the y-axis (his
> "planar napping") instead of conforming to the surface of the sphere
> (spherical mapping?).
>
> --
> Thomas


Oh, that is just an idea of mine.

Post a reply to this message