Allin Kahrl wrote:
> By aliasing it and knocking a pixel out of the
> tail like my attached .png?
That looks ugly. I don't think a pixels -> mill -> pixels process
makes much sense, since you'll never get back the same result.
I'd rather have one original ideal geometry and then a set of
derived (*) geometries for processes that can't approximate the
ideal geometry with sufficient accuracy.
(*) "Simple paths" and "constant radius" converge with the
pixelated original for tool diameter -> 0. "Constant width"
may or may not, depending on how the curvature is defined.
- Werner
_______________________________________________
Qi Hardware Discussion List
Mail to list (members only): [email protected]
Subscribe or Unsubscribe:
http://lists.en.qi-hardware.com/mailman/listinfo/discussion
