Re: concave polygons in performer

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Michael T. Jones (mtj++at++babar.asd.sgi.com)
Tue, 15 Oct 1996 10:25:25 -0700


On Oct 15, 9:45am, Angus Henderson wrote:
> Subject: Re: concave polygons in performer
> >It's probably a 4 sided polygon that's not coplaner.
>
> It must be not coplanar and not convex. You should have bought a Megatek.
They
> could render any old twisted thing - all the good it did them.
> ( Now mtj's gonna say "oh yes, a Star could do that too!" )

Well, as a matter of fact, the Graphicon 2000 did an ok job
on such things. It could render quads directly since it had four
edge evaluators that gave a thumbs-up/thumbs-down signal for all
the pixels inside the bounding box.

Rendering bow-ties (the phrase for such quads) is not really a
virtue in many cases:

 1. you know that it's bad when you're loading it so why not
    deal with it then rather than at the 11M/sec part of the
    graphics pipeline.

 2. color, lighting, clipping, and other such interpolation
    related issues are almost sure to be inconsistently done
    on any machine that renders more than 3-sided polygons
    directly.

 3. intersection results are going to give inconsistent normals
    anywhere "in" the non-planar quad. This is the same as #2,
    but it's generally host-based rather than in the pipeline.

My view on this is that points, lines, and triangles are not
only all that you need -- they're all that you want!

Michael
=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://www.sgi.com/Technology/Performer/
            Submissions: info-performer++at++sgi.com
        Admin. requests: info-performer-request++at++sgi.com


New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:53:46 PDT

This message has been cleansed for anti-spam protection. Replace '++at++' in any mail addresses with the '@' symbol.