9 ms·
I'd say what author means is the standard solution - which is equivalent to his on triangles but is on pixels ... except there's nothing naive about it and by u
by chrisjj 2mo ago
I'd say what author means is the standard solution - which is equivalent to his on triangles but is on pixels ... except there's nothing naive about it and by using GPU parallelism and depth hardware it is lower cost on dense meshes.
- uecker 2mo agoI really hope nobody computes the volume by rendering in 3D and counting pixels.
- chrisjj 2mo agoRendering in 2D and summing per-pixel Z-spans. For a finely meshed shape and approx. result, it has by far the lowest cost.
- uecker 2mo agoYes, this makes more sense as you at least collapse the third dimensions, but I would assume this formula is still faster when implemented efficiently.