Subject:
|
Why should parts not have vertices lying along edges?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:35:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
339 times
|
| |
|
|
For this discussion, I'm using the term "polygon" to refer to quads or
triangles. When I say "primitive", I'm talking about more complex
primitives such as discs and non-discs. And when I refer to "edges", I'm
talking about line segments between a pair of vertices- NOT type 2 or type 5
lines.
When designing parts, I always try to avoid having a vertex from one polygon
lying along the edge of another polygon. I took up this practice because I
was told that if you do have a vertex along an edge, some renderers will
round the vertex to a position off of the edge and you'll get gaps from some
angles. In most cases, it's not too hard to break up the surrounding
polygons such that all adjacent polys have a vertex there. However, when
using primitives you don't have the luxury of re-splitting them to create
vertices along the edges. So a small non-disc that lays along the edge of a
larger non-disc just can't be fixed correctly.
I realize that I *could* inline the primitive and then break it up manually.
For starters, that's way more work than I want to do. But more importantly,
L3P's primitive substitution will then not kick in and the part will not
look its best in POV-Ray.
To the question(s)...
How bad is this? Should I care at all? Which renderers have this problem,
or which have it the worst? Is this a rule that I can happily throw out if
there is much to be gained by doing so?
--
Tony Hafner
www.hafhead.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
3 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
