Pages: 1 [2]

The problem with 3d

Re: The problem with 3d
« Reply #15 on: May 16, 2012, 03:04:10 pm »

I wasn't complaining about the aesthetics as much as I was about the whole clunky process.
Logged

Irony is for cowards.
Re: The problem with 3d
« Reply #16 on: May 19, 2012, 07:30:13 am »

I wasn't complaining about the aesthetics as much as I was about the whole clunky process.

The easier / more cost-efficient alternative is to use a post-processing effect that mimics some of the aesthetics you're after.

I was hoping that I could pair this with a totally different creation method - if you're not building with triangles, you'd have to build with something else. If you can tolerate a probabilistic rendering method, maybe you could tolerate a more probalistic data representation and sketchy creation process. That's how I meant to address the original topic of discussion.

I have some vague ideas of how you might go about this, but nothing specific.
Logged
Re: The problem with 3d
« Reply #17 on: May 19, 2012, 12:20:59 pm »

I was hoping that I could pair this with a totally different creation method - if you're not building with triangles, you'd have to build with something else. If you can tolerate a probabilistic rendering method, maybe you could tolerate a more probalistic data representation and sketchy creation process.

That's definitely the better approach, but ( as mentioned ) it takes a significant investment.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
Jump to: