Hi Cory, can you report any updates for this issue?
Best regards and thanks for your efforts Philipp On 09/19/2014 07:17 PM, Cory Quammen wrote: > Just a little more info on this. The problem starts with 3.98. > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Philipp E. <pspeac...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Sorry Cory, >> >> you are right. The cell number is the same. >> >> Regards >> Philipp >> >> >> Am 19.09.2014 um 17:46 schrieb Cory Quammen: >>> Philipp, >>> >>> I can confirm what you see with a pre 4.2 version of ParaView. >>> However, the number of produced cells is the same. >>> >>> I will try to track down why this changed. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Cory >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Philipp E <pspeac...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Hi Cory >>>> >>>> I managed to compress the data set to a fair size and attached it to >>>> this mail. The data set is pressure, contour value is 0.55. >>>> >>>> By looking again at the data (contour -> information), I just found that >>>> the old version (3.14.1) uses 148432 cells , while the the new one >>>> employs 75232 cells. Hope that helps. >>>> >>>> Kind regards >>>> Philipp >>>> >>>> Errata: I meant 4.2.0RC1 in the previous mails. >>>> >>>> On 09/19/2014 04:59 PM, Cory Quammen wrote: >>>>> Phillipp, >>>>> >>>>> Do you have a data set similar to the one you've shown that you can share? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Cory >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Philipp E <pspeac...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Hi Cory, >>>>>> >>>>>> thank you for your fast feedback. >>>>>> >>>>>> a) Compute normal is checked. (Without normals, the contour is >>>>>> completely stepped) >>>>>> b) Contour values are the same. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Philipp >>>>>> >>>>>> On 09/19/2014 04:40 PM, Cory Quammen wrote: >>>>>>> Philipp, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In the contour filter, is the option "Compute Normals" checked in 4.0 >>>>>>> RC1? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also, are the contour values the same between the two versions? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Cory >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Philipp E <pspeac...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> Hello everyone, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> after extensive search I was desperate enough to post on this list: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It appears that the surface smoothing algorithm of the contour filter >>>>>>>> does not work as "aggressive" as in older version (3.14.1 was the last >>>>>>>> one we found to do so). As an example I prepared this two screenshots, >>>>>>>> VTK data are scalars on a structured grid (200x100x100), legacy format. >>>>>>>> (An additional call of the "smooth" filter does not help.) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 3.14.1 >>>>>>>> http://s7.directupload.net/images/140919/euadfvko.png >>>>>>>> 4.0.RC1 >>>>>>>> http://s14.directupload.net/images/140919/84y689mi.png >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Both versions are running with the shipped settings. Since the effect >>>>>>>> could be reproduced on several workstations, we are wondering whether >>>>>>>> there has been an (undocumented?) change in the filter mechanism or >>>>>>>> some >>>>>>>> option we/setting/data problem we are not aware of. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Kind regards and thanks in advance >>>>>>>> Philipp Engels. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> Powered by www.kitware.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at >>>>>>>> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at: >>>>>>>> http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: >>>>>>>> http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview _______________________________________________ Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at: http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview