Re: Q: pfLayerModes

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Angus Dorbie (dorbie++at++multipass.asd.sgi.com)
Thu, 12 Jun 1997 17:18:08 -0700

On Jun 12, 1:15pm, Marcus Barnes wrote:
> Subject: Re: Q: pfLayerModes

> Coplanarity tolerance can be a problem for STENCIL. Performer 2.x requires a
> much tighter (truer) tolerance than 1.x did.

I don't understand why this should be.

Can anyone furnish an explanation?

Thanks,
Angus.
=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://www.sgi.com/Technology/Performer/
            Submissions: info-performer++at++sgi.com
        Admin. requests: info-performer-request++at++sgi.com
   SGI DevForum 97 info: http://www.sgi.com/Forum97/

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:55:26 PDT

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