"Kenneth" <kdw### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
 https://news.povray.org/povray.newusers/thread/%3Cweb.4a13ff1fd9818dbeab6e42900%40news.povray.org%3E/?mtop=310905
>
> Maybe there is a germ of an idea somewhere in that discussion that will be of
> use.

Yes, maybe if you reread that, you'll see where you don't understand their
point.

I don't exactly understand clipka's example but...


One way to address the color selection would be to allow the optional inclusion
of a hierarchical index in the cutaway_textures call.   No index averages the
colors as is currently the default behaviour.  Supplying an index allows the
user to choose some texture in whatever texture hierarchy that POV-Ray
constructs, up to the max.   So, if there are only 2, and you supply 20, then
it's texture #2.

Thinking about clipka's point about other software packages, I suppose it would
be useful to have a macro called Union () that differences away one object from
another before creating a union {} of them, thereby conveniently eliminating the
problem in the first place.

I do very much like your suggestion of the partial contribution of the cutting
object's texture to the surface.  Like adding a bit of f or t in the cutting
object's texture to act as a filter to view the final surface through to modify
the final cutaway_texture result, or applying a faint amount of dye in the
cutter to tint the surface.   That would be useful indeed.

And truly, I think it would be as simple as adding the cutting object's texture
into the averaged result.  Since enabling that would require a flag of some
sort, and a source-rewrite / new keyword or optional auxiliary keyword (like
sturm), then you would just supply a weighting for the cutting object's
contribution to the average.

(And this is written knowingly full well what "just" entails  ;) )

- BW

Post a reply to this message