To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.devOpen lugnet.cad.dev in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / Development / 3467
3466  |  3468
Subject: 
Re: Line in the Sand
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.dev
Date: 
Tue, 14 Dec 1999 12:08:27 GMT
Viewed: 
2825 times
  
Steve Bliss wrote...
In lugnet.cad.dev, Lars C. Hassing wrote:

Steve Bliss wrote in message ...
Decorations on transparent parts shows through when looking at the part from
behind.  If the decoration polygons were put through the BFC-check, they would
be clipped in this situation, because the decoration is facing away from the
viewer.

Remember BFC must be disabled for transparent parts. That's what
  If 32 <= Color And Color <= 47 Then AccumClip = FALSE
takes care of.

Hmm. that makes me wonder if the logic of turning of BFC clipping when a part's
color is transparent will really work.  Because a part may have the main color
as 16, and some sections are hard-coded to a transparent color.  In this case,
the suggested logic would fail to cull correctly.

   If IsTransparent(Color) Then AccumClip = FALSE
takes care of solid non-16 colors (decorations) in parts used transparently.
And a similar check added to BFC() can take care of transparent non-16
colors in parts used as solids.
So the logic is OK again.


7 If 32 <= Color And Color <= 47 Then // This restriction may or may not be
7    AccumClip = FALSE                // required, depending on the style of
7 End If                              // rendering for transparent surfaces.

What do you mean with the comment?
That dither-transparency can use BFC?

That is correct.

Well, in that case we do need
double-sided sections for decorations!

That's what I was thinking. :)

On second thoughts I don't think we need double-sided sections for decorations.
If a rendering program wishes to use BFC together with dither-transparency, it
can easily investigate whether there are non-16 colors in a transparent part.

We should not put an unnecessary rule on the part author.


In Danish we have a noun (vrang) meaning "wrong side" or "reverse side".
I can't seem to find a similar English noun.

Do you mean inside-out or back?

I mean the inner surface. Like the "internal surface" of a sweater or a stocking.
If you don't have a similar noun/substantive/notion in English I can understand
why the subject is difficult to discuss, because we think/conceive differently
(as our spoken languages reflect) about the "inside surface".
/Lars



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Line in the Sand
 
(...) Yes, it would render correctly, but it would also disable clipping more often than is required, in the case of mixed solid and transparent sections. Think of a submodel where the author used color 16, and the person using the submodel renders (...) (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Line in the Sand
 
(...) Hmm. that makes me wonder if the logic of turning of BFC clipping when a part's color is transparent will really work. Because a part may have the main color as 16, and some sections are hard-coded to a transparent color. In this case, the (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)

85 Messages in This Thread:

























Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR