Re: Uberlight - Superellipse Derivation
- From: Rick LaMont <lamont@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 18 Apr 2006 11:47:15 +0200
Ryan <heniser@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Apparently, there is no algebraic manipulation(s) that will yield this
result.
It's meant to be an algebraic step but I believe it's an error. The
good news is that it's undone two lines later so the result is correct!
After factoring out the q^(2/d), you should be left with:
(Px/a)^(2/d) + (Py/b)^(2/d) (1)
The mistake is in reducing(?) this expression to:
(Px/a) ((2/d) + (Py/b))^(2/d) (2)
I plugged in some sample values for a, b, d, etc. The two expressions
above are *not* equal. So it stays in form (2) for one step before
reverting back to form (1), the way it should have been all along.
It could have started with a typesetting error. If (2/d) dropped from
superscript to normal, someone might have tried to fix it by putting
that term inside the parentheses...
Rick LaMont
Dot C Software, Inc.
http://www.dotcsw.com/
Inviato da X-Privat.Org - Registrazione gratuita http://www.x-privat.org/join.php
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Uberlight - Superellipse Derivation
- From: Ryan
- Re: Uberlight - Superellipse Derivation
- Prev by Date: Re: Help with depth maps
- Next by Date: Re: bypassing RIB generation
- Previous by thread: bypassing RIB generation
- Next by thread: Re: Uberlight - Superellipse Derivation
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
