5 ms·

How about a realtime ray-traced version of multiple balls, with the viewpoint turning around the balls?

• rbanffy 17y ago
  That would require the watcher to be educated. It's an impressive technical achievement, but people see the same kind of image everyday on the TV. It's just not real-time. You could compute the physics of billions of snowflakes in an video in real-time, but, still, unless your audience is educated to appreciate what you are doing and the immense implications of having a computer capable of doing that, it's lost.
  • slater 17y ago
    In that case, there's not much you CAN show, visually, unless it's up there with Avatar-like quality of imagery.
    • rbanffy 17y ago
      I know. That's why it's hard to answer the question. A quantitative improvement in display quality and performance is not enough. And, remember, Amigas were relatively inexpensive machines targeted at home users (the whole video art thing was an accident), so, making the thing output 2160p120 3D video is not an option unless you could do that on a budget.