Hacker News Reader

Looks like "voxel" in the classical sense -- i.e., "volumetric pixel" -- rather than the newfangled notion of low fidelity 3D modeling with large, textured cubes (à la Minecraft).

View on HN

Voxel data is just a bunch of points, the rendering mechanism makes it no more or less 'voxely'. Ultimately you have some scheme to take your voxel data and turn it into triangles that you can display if your goal is 3d. If you use plain cubes, you will get Minecraft-esque things, at least if you get close enough to the surface. If you use a technique like marching cubes or tetrahedron you can make very fluid or blobby looking things but it is very hard to make a flat surface or a sharp corner. There are methods like dual-contouring which can do both sharp corners and fluid surfaces, but are a more complex, and require combining various densities of voxel data to render fine details. Stitching the voxels of different densities has its own challenges, at least without creating gross artifacts at the edges.

I hadn't thought about it that way before. Thanks for the information!

Ultimately you have some scheme to take your voxel data and turn it into triangles that you can display if your goal is 3d.

This assumption is false, which is precisely the point I was trying to make. The only readily available commercial hardware requires the program to turn everything into triangles to be hardware accelerated. But there are means of rendering that can use the voxels directly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com