2 ms·
Playing with the example, the controls points don’t feel any more intuitive to work with than traditional cubic Béziers. They still exhibit annoying behaviors n
by dcrazy 2mo ago
Playing with the example, the controls points don’t feel any more intuitive to work with than traditional cubic Béziers. They still exhibit annoying behaviors near the endpoints, though they don’t tend to “explode” like traditional cubics.
I find it curious that the author makes no attempt to compare his solution to other splines like B-splines or Catmull-Rom splines, given their popularity in computer graphics and CAD.
- dahart 2mo ago> the author makes no attempt to compare his solution to other splines like B-splines or Catmull-Rom I’d argue that talking about Bézier is absolutely sufficient in this context; B-splines and Catmull-Rom splines and a few other types are all piecewise polynomial splines (cubic specifically, at least in the case of Catmull-Rom). You can convert B-splines and Catmull-Rom splines to Bézier directly and analytically; therefore B-splines and Catmull-Rom splines cannot do anything beyond what Bézier curves can do. There are some minor usability / interface / intuition differences, but there is no difference in mathematical control.