Can every polygon split be done in parallel? It seems inefficient to have to loop through every polygon in the entire mesh.
Max
Certainly, although it might be difficult to synchronize the updates properly if everything is operating on the same mesh.
As you will see in meshedit part 2, you can also implement this via creating an entirely new vertex + connectivity set, which can easily be done in parallel.
SnackMixer
For calculating edge coordinates in step 2, I wondering why don't we just take the average of a and b. It looks the same for taking the average of two points and four points.
Lockbrains
I feel confused about the step 3. What is that newly computed vertex? Why we need this vertex? Isn't this vertex just the shared vertex of those faces around?
msfernan
When would we use each different set of subdivisions that we learnt? (Linear/Catmull-Clark/loop). Why do we have these 3 types? Is it for different aesthetics?
Can every polygon split be done in parallel? It seems inefficient to have to loop through every polygon in the entire mesh.
Certainly, although it might be difficult to synchronize the updates properly if everything is operating on the same mesh.
As you will see in meshedit part 2, you can also implement this via creating an entirely new vertex + connectivity set, which can easily be done in parallel.
For calculating edge coordinates in step 2, I wondering why don't we just take the average of a and b. It looks the same for taking the average of two points and four points.
I feel confused about the step 3. What is that newly computed vertex? Why we need this vertex? Isn't this vertex just the shared vertex of those faces around?
When would we use each different set of subdivisions that we learnt? (Linear/Catmull-Clark/loop). Why do we have these 3 types? Is it for different aesthetics?