Hi Manu,
The TriStripVisitor shouldn't change anything in the data apart form
re-organize it. Adding in tolerances to the vertex comparisons would
require the vertex data to modified to collapse adjacent vertices's
onto the same position in space.
Would could add such functionality as an extra pass to
TriStripVisitor, but the default would have to be not to do this.
Personally I'd suggest having a separate visitor do this operation of
collapsing nearby vertices on to one another, and then pre-process the
data before tri-stripping it.
Robert.
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Emmanuel Roche
<roche.emman...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay,
>
> more details on this:
>
> the problem comes from the helper structure "VertexAttribComparitor"
>
> in the function VertexAttribComparitor::compare(unsigned int lhs, unsigned
> int rhs) we call the template array compare(unsigned int lhs, unsigned int
> rhs) function, and there we just use regular comparisons:
>
> virtual int compare(unsigned int lhs,unsigned int rhs) const
> {
> const T& elem_lhs = (*this)[lhs];
> const T& elem_rhs = (*this)[rhs];
> if (elem_lhs<elem_rhs) return -1;
> if (elem_rhs<elem_lhs) return 1;
> return 0;
> }
>
> here we don't take any "precision" into account at all... whereas my
> vertices are given in meter units and may have a little resolution of about
> 0.1 millimeter !
>
> So this implementation won't fit for my needs (and I think there is an high
> chance it may not fit the needs for many other people no ?) maybe we should
> add a "precision" parameter at some point, but for now I just don't have the
> time to deal with this properly :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Manu.
>
>
> 2009/11/23 Emmanuel Roche <roche.emman...@gmail.com>
>>
>> Hi Robert,
>>
>> Actually, I've noticed that the problem doesn't come from the underlying
>> tristripper library:
>>
>> instead, it seems that the indice array generated from my vertices is
>> incorrect: I suspect that the comparison function to find if too vertices
>> are the same or not is too precise in my case. Do you have a clear idea
>> where this is done ? (otherwise, I will just read more code and find it...)
>>
>> cheers,
>>
>> Manu.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2009/11/23 Emmanuel Roche <roche.emman...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Actually, I also noticed that OSG v2.8.1 uses version 1.0 of the
>>> tristripper library.
>>>
>>> As I'm quite in an hurry, I think I will re-implement my own
>>> tristripvisitor with the latest version of tristripper and check if this
>>> makes a difference. Will let you know what's the result of this test.
>>>
>>> But I believe this could really be a generic issue (it happens with all
>>> the models I tested) and thus would mean many people are currently using
>>> "not so well tri-stripped" geometries if they use this optimiser feature !
>>> (it is the case for instance in the OSGExp export plugin for 3DS max as I've
>>> noticed this issue there for the first time).
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> Manu.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2009/11/23 Robert Osfield <robert.osfi...@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Manu,
>>>>
>>>> If the tristripper doesn't connect the triangles together well then it
>>>> can result on few tristrips and lots of unconnected traingles that it
>>>> has to put into a single list of triangles to avoid lots of separate
>>>> primitive calls.
>>>>
>>>> As to why your model is not being stripped well I can't say. We've
>>>> used 3rd party code to do the tri-stripping so I'm not best placed to
>>>> answer the low level questions, but... the original author of the cdoe
>>>> Tanguy Fautre is now an OSG user and I believe still on the list so
>>>> perhaps he'll be able to chip in ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Robert.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Emmanuel Roche
>>>> <roche.emman...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > Hi everyone,
>>>> >
>>>> > I have a strange problem with the TryStripVisitor:
>>>> >
>>>> > When I use it on a model (with about 6000 triangles, described as
>>>> > TRIANGLES
>>>> > [thus using 18000 vertices]) I get trip strip primitive sets
>>>> > indeed.... BUT
>>>> > actually I get a few TRIANGLE_STRIP primitive sets with 4 vertices in
>>>> > each,
>>>> > and then a single big TRIANGLES primitive set with about 17950
>>>> > vertices !!!!
>>>> >
>>>> > So, most of the model is just not stripped at all ! any idea what I
>>>> > could be
>>>> > doing wrong ???
>>>> >
>>>> > Moreother, I've noticed that the geometry is then transformed as an
>>>> > indexed
>>>> > geometry... correct me if I'm wrong but indexed geometries are slower
>>>> > that
>>>> > simple vertices ordered arrays. If there a way to switch this or am I
>>>> > on my
>>>> > own on this ?
>>>> >
>>>> > Regards,
>>>> > Manu.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > osg-users mailing list
>>>> > osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org
>>>> >
>>>> > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> osg-users mailing list
>>>> osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org
>>>>
>>>> http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
>>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osg-users mailing list
> osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org
> http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
>
>
_______________________________________________
osg-users mailing list
osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org
http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
