It’s a simple model showing heights of vectors on a mesh surface. Meshes run much smoother then Nurbs and as such you can create complex geometry using the mesh tools and then colour using the mesh reconstruct tool.

The image is a simple screen shot, (unrendered) but holds powerful possibilities when it comes to evaluating geometry based on height/solar/shading systems.

Afternoon, correct me if I’m wrong, but both vertices and vector fit the description, since vertices refer to the points in space and vectors refers the position in space relative to other points which is how you apply gradients.

Computational simulation is all we do, geometrically it’s a means to an end.

Your acid trip will have to wait; don’t fully understand weaverbird meshes to make it look as awesome as yours.

A vertex(vertices) is a point in Cartesian space. A vector, is a velocity/movement in space. So a vertex (1,1,1) is different to a vector (1,1,1), the vector could be anywhere in Cartesian space.

You may be confused, In the first colour mesh example i showed (the solar incidence one) we used the normal vector of each mesh face. That is a direction, it was the direction the face was pointing. That was measured against the solar vector. And those measurements were remapped to colours to apply to the vertices.

I meant computationally simpler, as in meshes don’t require the computer to think so hard, so they are quicker (run smoother). But brep surfaces can be geometrically smooth, as in, infinitly smooth surface.

## 5 thoughts on “Meshes rule”

What is it? What does it do?

It’s a simple model showing heights of vectors on a mesh surface. Meshes run much smoother then Nurbs and as such you can create complex geometry using the mesh tools and then colour using the mesh reconstruct tool.

The image is a simple screen shot, (unrendered) but holds powerful possibilities when it comes to evaluating geometry based on height/solar/shading systems.

Few pedantic notes Richard; Vectors or Vertices? Meshes run smoother? computationally yes, geometrically not necessarily, Construct mesh,

Harry, you can find the basic logic of this in either the ‘mesh’ or the ‘kangaroo’ tutorial definitions that have been emailed to everyone.

I agree meshes rule. I take your mesh surface and raise you my mesh ‘acid trip’ series http://www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/albums/acid-trip

Afternoon, correct me if I’m wrong, but both vertices and vector fit the description, since vertices refer to the points in space and vectors refers the position in space relative to other points which is how you apply gradients.

Computational simulation is all we do, geometrically it’s a means to an end.

Your acid trip will have to wait; don’t fully understand weaverbird meshes to make it look as awesome as yours.

A vertex(vertices) is a point in Cartesian space. A vector, is a velocity/movement in space. So a vertex (1,1,1) is different to a vector (1,1,1), the vector could be anywhere in Cartesian space.

You may be confused, In the first colour mesh example i showed (the solar incidence one) we used the normal vector of each mesh face. That is a direction, it was the direction the face was pointing. That was measured against the solar vector. And those measurements were remapped to colours to apply to the vertices.

I meant computationally simpler, as in meshes don’t require the computer to think so hard, so they are quicker (run smoother). But brep surfaces can be geometrically smooth, as in, infinitly smooth surface.