You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Found this special case:
If two faces meet in an acute angle and they face in opposing directions, preferring to close voxels can lead to the wrong result.
Both voxels would be closed. in the first voxel the assumption is correct, in the other one it's wrong.
Maybe it's enough to consider the normal with the greater absolute value in z direction, because a lot is already known: The two faces meet at a point within the voxel and this point is both faces' highest point.. @Steditor What do you think? Is this plausible?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
If it's not two faces that meet within the voxel but faces that both cross the top of the voxel it doesn't matter because the voxel above will be a hull voxel, too.
stuikomma
changed the title
fix voxelizer (yet another)
YAVI (Yet Another Voxelizer Issue)
Jul 21, 2015
Found this special case:
If two faces meet in an acute angle and they face in opposing directions, preferring to close voxels can lead to the wrong result.
Both voxels would be closed. in the first voxel the assumption is correct, in the other one it's wrong.
Maybe it's enough to consider the normal with the greater absolute value in z direction, because a lot is already known: The two faces meet at a point within the voxel and this point is both faces' highest point..
@Steditor What do you think? Is this plausible?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: