[Radiance-general] another water question

[Gregory J. Ward]

Hi Lars,

The way I'd recommend creating such a scene is to regenerate the  
water mesh, then add the little bit of geometry containing the "mesh"  
primitive that references to an existing octree, a la:

	obj2mesh water.obj > water.rtm
	oconv -f -i scene-water.oct water.rad > scene+water.oct

Where water.rad contains the mesh primitive and maybe a material.   
The oconv command only takes as long as it takes to read and write  
back out the octree -- best if it's frozen for that reason.

If you know for certain that your mesh always ends up with the same  
overall dimensions, you don't even need to rerun oconv, technically.

-Greg

> From: Lars Grobe <grobe at gmx.net>
> Date: May 26, 2006 4:03:05 AM PDT
>
> Hi,
>
> one idea... as this will require generating the octree for every  
> frame, I wonder if it helps to make a frozen octree of the whole  
> scene except the water, scene.oct. Than exporting only the water  
> objects for each frame, lets call them water[FRAME].rtm. Now if you  
> write a script that creates scenes with only two objects, one being  
> an instance of scene.oct, the second a mesh object water 
> [FRAME].rtm. That way you will not have to run octree each time on  
> the whole scene, right?
>
> In fact, I wanted to propose to use the -i option of oconv so that  
> you can type oconv -i scene.oct water[FRAME].rad > scene 
> [FRAME].oct. But who uses obj2rad any more... ;-)
>
> What do you think folks, I cannot try that at the moment to find if  
> the gain from less work in oconv is worth the overhead. Also  
> instance and mesh would overlap completely.
>
> CU Lars.