2 ms·
Very astute, thank you for bringing this to my attention. So it'd be about 2 and 58/70 times the maximum frequency, assuming two-dimensional sampling. As for h
by microcolonel 10y ago
Very astute, thank you for bringing this to my attention. So it'd be about 2 and 58/70 times the maximum frequency, assuming two-dimensional sampling.
As for hexagonal grids, there are a number of complications introduced by that, especially when it comes to using general algorithms based on regular 2D euclidean space.
- rleigh 10y agoWith a sampling rate of 2 on the diagonal, you'd have a rate of 2.828 on the axes, with a square grid (2 * sqrt(2)). Unless I'm missing something. Agreed about the complications of the hexagonal grid. We make implicit assumptions everywhere. Though I'm not sure they are insurmountable for some purposes; with graphics APIs like OpenGL, texture coordinates and samplers could be using a hexagonal grid relatively transparently. That would allow use of hexagonal displays even if the texture data is square.