it is possible that at some point it reflects back on itself and creates a bigger box? Sort of like how if you try to compress one dimension too small that dimension goes completely flat?
Conversation
Hmmm, maybe, but I'm not the expert on this exact area as it's pretty in depth is the pro here as he coded it :)
1
1
The bounding box controls the underlying voxel/sdf res, a cube of say 10 X 10 X 10 etc. Which is aligned to the sculpt's grid, which is combined with the fleck density on the outside to create the cost of the object/
2
1
And the bounding box jumps up and down by powers of 2 I believe.
Pro tip is use the cut out tool, aligned to the local grid of the sculpt, using a cube shape to help optimise the sculpt to the max (technically just lets you add more the max tightness possible)
1
3
Yep graphics cost should be roughly the number of flecks, but there are some rounding effects that can move that number around a bit. Grid size snaps to the nearest power of approx 1.19 (4 levels for each power of 2).
1
2
Heres the experiment I've run: I lay down a 2 dot cube in standard grid. Then I go to successively smaller grid sizes and peel that amount off each dimension with stretch. 1/8 grid size is the most expensive.(15/8x15/8x15/8) Would the rounding be the thing accounting for that?
1
Maybe! Grid-aligned cubes are kind of a worst case, I'd expect results that more closely follow the number of flecks for a sphere (or a sculpt with a more complex shape).