Asymptote inconsistently draws the following figure depending on what draw commands are commented out.

import graph3;

// draw #1

path3 p1=(1,0,0)--(1,2,0)--(3,2,0)--(3,0,0);
// draw #2
draw(surface(p1 -- cycle), emissive(gray+opacity(.6)));

path3 p2=(0,1,0)--(2,1,4)--(2,0,0);
draw(surface(p2 -- cycle), emissive(gray+opacity(.6)));

path3 p3=(2,0,0)--(2,1,4)--(2,1,0);
draw(surface(p3 -- cycle), emissive(gray+opacity(.6)));

As is, parts of 3 planes and a closed path in space is drawn. The planes are drawn in a light gray color.

If the draw command after draw #2 is commented out, the two remaining planes are now drawn in black.

If the both draw commands after draw #1 and draw #2 are commented out, nothing is drawn.

This behavior is exhibited when I use the default Asymptote viewer and when I create a .pdf.

My default render options: -tex "latex" -V -render=-1.

My .pdf render options: -f pdf -render=-3 -noView -noprc -antialias 2 -tex "xelatex"

I'm using Asymptote 2.41, Ghostscript 9.21.

Can anyone explain this behavior?

  • Generally speaking, Asymptote does not handle 3d transparency very well unless render=0. – Charles Staats Sep 27 '17 at 20:57

When I run your 3 versions of the code and view it in Adobe Acrobat Reader or SumatraPDF I see the following images. I used all your render options with Asymptote 2.38 and Ghostscript 9.19. I know this doesn't directly answer your question, but maybe it will help.

enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here

| improve this answer | |
  • Thanks. Knowing my Windows machine, it's probably "just me." – GregH Sep 27 '17 at 15:09

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.