Andy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
FWIW, I'd argue that exactly 45° is a very bad choice, since octagonal
objects are going to be reasonably common in practice. Setting the
smooth angle at exactly their corner angle means that any amount of
modelling slop or round-off errors in such an object
Sam Stickland [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I'd really prefer the code to go into plib, as I'm using that for some of my
projects, and not simgear ;)
That's fine for the flightgear people as this is clearly an improvement,
especially for the blender conversions. Keep in mind though that this does
Jim Wilson wrote:
Ok the problem shows up with objects triangulated as follows: Picture
a diamond shape. Split it vertically so that you now have two
triangles, one on the left and the other on the right. Split the one
on the right horizontally. Now you have three triangles.
Yup. And one
Andy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
It's 180 minus the inner angle. Setting it to zero means that even an
edge along a flat surface will be considered sharp and split,
setting it to 180 means that even true knife edges won't get split
(this is the behavior without the patch).
So are you
Jim Wilson wrote:
So are you saying that the currently coded 46 value means that
angles between non averaged normals of greater than 134 degrees
(180-46) will be considered sharp? This appears to be the case, but
I want to be sure.
Right. Except I've stated it incorrectly twice now. :)
Andy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
It's neither the inner nor the outer angle, really. It's the angle
formed between the two surface normals. Strictly: the cosine of the
sharp angle is the threshold for the dot product of the two normals.
If they dot together with a value greater than this
Steve Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Erik Hofman wrote:
Jim Wilson wrote:
So far the code looks very efficient. Nice job! I'm wondering now if we
should be locating this work in simgear rather than plib. It would be
easy
enough to do so, and it would and allow us a great deal of
Jim Wilson wrote:
Alright...so that _is_ an interesting value. It would require a good
deal of precision on the modelers part in order to round a corner with
3 sides. I wonder now if this coincides with the default crease 45
in ac3d's implementation.
FWIW, I'd argue that exactly 45° is a
Andy Ross wrote:
Anyway, I think I've finally got this thing working. Grab a new copy
at http://www.plausible.org/vertsplit/vertsplit2.tar.gz, dump it into
your ssg directory and try it out. I've run it on a bunch of
FlightGear aircraft and am quite happy with the results. No more
seam along
Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Andy Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Anyway, I think I've finally got this thing working. Grab a new copy
at http://www.plausible.org/vertsplit/vertsplit2.tar.gz, dump it into
your ssg directory and try it out. I've run it on a bunch of
FlightGear
10 matches
Mail list logo
