My point was that it needs another option control added in order to maintain a certain consistency .
Hi Garry, Maybe you should investigate names like Catmull and Clark, before complaining about SDS objects.
2 questions : 1) Why must you always talk to me like I'm the dummy ? 2) Why must I always repeat myself ?
You could find them in the Wikipedia for instance. This might help to understand SDS objects better.
The concept is simple . The Realsoft application of that concept seems (to me) a very nice , compact approach . What I have been addressing is a sub-topic of that approach, the texturing of SDS objects . Still , years later, this area is very rough around the edges and could use refinements .
Everything has its price. When you want the benefits of a low poly control cage with a smooth hi poly model as your final object, you'll have to deal with certain characteristics. Arjo.
This is exactly the attitude that plagues this community . If the small inexactitudes I've discovered , were pointed out years ago , they would have been remedied out by now . Many of the "pain in the ass" nuisances that you guys have chosen to ignore , are still there biting new users in the butt . Take this idiotic tendency , one step further , and we have advanced users , still choosing to ignore bogus interface glitches to the point of "grabbing for straws" to defend them . Sorry , but if I see something out of place , I'll point it out . If RS chooses to leave duly noted inconsistencies in the program , so be it , ... who cares ? However , if someone new comes along and makes suggestions for a higher performance methodology , I don't think I'll be telling him he doesn't know what he's talking about . In fact , I might go crazy and actually post a mail saying something like , "yes , I noticed that myself" . garry
