Subject:
|
Re: 1-8sphe.dat tesselations compaire image
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Date:
|
Wed, 4 Oct 2000 03:56:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
801 times
|
| |
|
|
"Manfred Moolhuysen" <moom@nospamchello.nl> wrote in message
news:G1uxnB.I8H@lugnet.com...
> 4 days ago I've posted that I've made a compaire image showing the two
> possible alternatives for surface tesselations for the 1-8sphe.dat • primitive.
> I've waited a while before giving my own opinion, but here it is:
>
> For me, the proposed alternative for the tesselation, using 16 triangles • per
> sector, has no substantial benifit over the tesselation as used in the
> existing official primitive, using 9 quads and 4 triangles per sector.
> My arguments:
>
> The inaccurate coordinate values that the old 1-8sphe.dat primitive still • had,
> have been resolved with a fix submitted by Axel Poqué and I in August this
> year. (This fix is part of the recent 2000-02 update)
>
> I think that face distribution with 9 quads and 4 triangles isn't a
> disadvantage compaired with Travis Cobbs his distribution with 16 • triangles.
> In the compaire image http://members.ams.chello.nl/mmoolhuy/compaire.jpg
> it seems to me that the existing 9 quads and 4 triangles tesselation is • even
> better looking that the proposed 16 triangle alternative. In my opinion, • the
> dome on the right looks a little smoother than the dome on the left.
>
> Calculation of intersection points with other faces is easyer for the • existing
> primitive than for the proposed alternartive.
>
>
> However, I appreciate that Travis did made an effort, and hope I haven't
> discouraged him to make other contributions in the future. After all, he • was
> right in saying that (at least) the accuracy of the old primitive had to • be
> improved.
Works for me. Don't worry about the discouragement part. In all fairness,
I hadn't yet spent much time on generating the file I produced, due to the
fact that I had already gone to the large amount of effort to get the
algorithm working for my LDView program. That meant that all I had to do
was get the triangles written to a file, which was pretty straightforward.
Also, the lack of response seems indicative of either complete lack of
preference by the community, or an unwillingness to take sides. Either way,
you're right about your new sphere primitive being fine, and it does have
the advantage of precedence (both by being generated first, and closely
resembling the original primitive).
--Travis Cobbs (tcobbs@san.REMOVE.rr.com)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: 1-8sphe.dat tesselations compaire image
|
| 4 days ago I've posted that I've made a compaire image showing the two possible alternatives for surface tesselations for the 1-8sphe.dat primitive. I've waited a while before giving my own opinion, but here it is: For me, the proposed alternative (...) (24 years ago, 3-Oct-00, to lugnet.cad)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
