On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 11:53 AM, fabio riot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Robert, > Going back to scene graph? >> have I to create 1) a scene with one geode for each geometry? or 2) only >> one >> geode containing all N geometry? > > My question is: > Why do the two solutions seem to behave in the same way?
If they don't then cull performance isn't the bottleneck. It's also not likely to make much difference to cull anyway unless you properly build a quad tree of the scene graph. Large flat nodes be that osg::Group or osg::Geode are inefficient to traverse. > Should the first way better fot "frustum culling phase"? > I thought each geodes (leaf node) had own boundig volume used by the > OSG to chose which geometry render... They do, its the a quad/octr tree structure to your scene graph that is likely to help the cull traversal, but only if some of the scene graph will be culled by the cull traversal. In you own example cull isn't likely to be the bottleneck anyway so it's best to concentrate on what is the bottleneck - the sheer amount of data you have and the way that you pass it to OpenGL. I've gone over all of this before in this thread. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
