Philipp, Great, I'm glad to hear it is working again as you expect.
- Cory On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 3:17 AM, Philipp E <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Cory, > > you are correct. This tiny change solves the problem! I hope that our > discussion will also allow others to review their output code with > respect to this change. > > Thank you very much for clarification and your help (and your great > software as well). > > Best regards > Philipp Engels > > On 10/10/2014 07:20 PM, Cory Quammen wrote: >> Hi Philipp, >> >> I looked into this more, and it turns out it isn't a bug, but a new >> feature in ParaView/VTK that lets provides more flexibility in the >> numeric type of the point positions. By default, most filters will set >> the numeric type of the output points to the numeric type of their >> inputs. In the data set you sent me, the points are set to have type >> int (specified on line 7), which means that the points in the output >> of the Contour filter will be cast to ints. This explains the jagged >> appearance of your surfaces. >> >> The change in VTK that brings about this behavior is: >> >> commit f830ef4cd79b1e7c8af2fae6ed1dd02ffa2cd670 >> Author: Paul Edwards <[email protected]> >> Date: Thu Jan 10 10:01:47 2013 -0500 >> >> Fixing loss of point-precision in certain filters. >> >> Certain filters tend to loose point precision and end up >> converting double point >> arrays to flot arrays. This patch address the issue for a few >> filters using the >> API added to vtkAlgorithm by commit 49d1f124. >> >> Change-Id: I8740e4e4bfdd9944fbadb45744038e42eff04830 >> >> Now, how to fix your problem? If you change the type of points from >> int to double in your data file so that it reads >> >> POINTS 6823544 double >> >> instead of >> >> POINTS 6823544 int >> >> all should work as expected. >> >> Please let me know if that doesn't solve the problem for you. >> >> Best regards, >> Cory >> >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Cory Quammen <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Philipp, >>> >>> I apologize, but I haven't had time to look more into this problem. >>> I'll have another look soon. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Cory >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 3:11 AM, Philipp E <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Hi Cory, >>>> >>>> can you report any updates for this issue? >>>> >>>> Best regards and thanks for your efforts >>>> Philipp >>>> >>>> On 09/19/2014 07:17 PM, Cory Quammen wrote: >>>>> Just a little more info on this. The problem starts with 3.98. >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Philipp E. <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Sorry Cory, >>>>>> >>>>>> you are right. The cell number is the same. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Philipp >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Am 19.09.2014 um 17:46 schrieb Cory Quammen: >>>>>>> Philipp, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I can confirm what you see with a pre 4.2 version of ParaView. >>>>>>> However, the number of produced cells is the same. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I will try to track down why this changed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Cory >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Philipp E <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Cory >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I managed to compress the data set to a fair size and attached it to >>>>>>>> this mail. The data set is pressure, contour value is 0.55. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> By looking again at the data (contour -> information), I just found >>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>> the old version (3.14.1) uses 148432 cells , while the the new one >>>>>>>> employs 75232 cells. Hope that helps. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kind regards >>>>>>>> Philipp >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Errata: I meant 4.2.0RC1 in the previous mails. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 09/19/2014 04:59 PM, Cory Quammen wrote: >>>>>>>>> Phillipp, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Do you have a data set similar to the one you've shown that you can >>>>>>>>> share? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> Cory >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Philipp E <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Hi Cory, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> thank you for your fast feedback. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> a) Compute normal is checked. (Without normals, the contour is >>>>>>>>>> completely stepped) >>>>>>>>>> b) Contour values are the same. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>> Philipp >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 09/19/2014 04:40 PM, Cory Quammen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Philipp, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In the contour filter, is the option "Compute Normals" checked in >>>>>>>>>>> 4.0 RC1? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Also, are the contour values the same between the two versions? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> Cory >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Philipp E <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Hello everyone, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> after extensive search I was desperate enough to post on this list: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It appears that the surface smoothing algorithm of the contour >>>>>>>>>>>> filter >>>>>>>>>>>> does not work as "aggressive" as in older version (3.14.1 was the >>>>>>>>>>>> last >>>>>>>>>>>> one we found to do so). As an example I prepared this two >>>>>>>>>>>> screenshots, >>>>>>>>>>>> VTK data are scalars on a structured grid (200x100x100), legacy >>>>>>>>>>>> format. >>>>>>>>>>>> (An additional call of the "smooth" filter does not help.) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 3.14.1 >>>>>>>>>>>> http://s7.directupload.net/images/140919/euadfvko.png >>>>>>>>>>>> 4.0.RC1 >>>>>>>>>>>> http://s14.directupload.net/images/140919/84y689mi.png >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Both versions are running with the shipped settings. Since the >>>>>>>>>>>> effect >>>>>>>>>>>> could be reproduced on several workstations, we are wondering >>>>>>>>>>>> whether >>>>>>>>>>>> there has been an (undocumented?) change in the filter mechanism >>>>>>>>>>>> or some >>>>>>>>>>>> option we/setting/data problem we are not aware of. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Kind regards and thanks in advance >>>>>>>>>>>> Philipp Engels. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> Powered by www.kitware.com >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: >>>>>>>>>>>> http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview > _______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at: http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
