Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

4
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Excellent answer, I'm very happy to see this! According to the bonus rules I posted, a 200 point bounty will be winging its way to you in about a week, assuming no other no-built-in-compression answer beats your score before then. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Mar 20, 2016 at 13:43
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to CG.SE! Nice first post! \$\endgroup\$ Commented Mar 20, 2016 at 14:24
  • \$\begingroup\$ This is excellent. I'm somewhat surprised the blur works so well; I tried a few different blur parameters on my outputs and it's possible for my perl solution to go under 5k, but unfortunately I don't have an easy way to apply it. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Mar 27, 2016 at 7:43
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The blur is on during the optimization (its radius is an optimizable parameter), so each primitive that is selected is found with the blur. This may make the blur appear more important than it is. If it was reoptimized with the blur forced to be off, it would probably recover some of that value. But scores are definitely better overall with the blur than without - I tried without it for a while. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Apr 3, 2016 at 12:32