Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: FlightGear/src/Main main.cxx,1.245,1.246
On 5 Mar 2002, at 8:40, Curtis L. Olson wrote: David, This is going to mess up rendering of distant mountains for people with voodoo cards (i.e. 16 bit buffers). And not just 16 bit cards - I get flashing polygons in the sky with two different 32 bit cards at 0.5, progressively cured by pushing out to 1.2ish, although no-one else seems to be afflicted by this. Cheers - Dave -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: FlightGear/src/Main main.cxx,1.245,1.246
Alex Perry writes: and for the latter you're in ground haze in any case. You Californians speak for yourselves! :-) Cheers - Dave -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: FlightGear/src/Main main.cxx,1.245,1.246
Curtis L. Olson wrote: I'm really nervous about forcing this down to 0.1 for all cases. This will mess things up for people with voodoo cards. Can we change this back? Perhaps we need to do a separate pass for rendering the 3d model and change the near clip plane just for that portion of the rendering. I'm with Curt. Coming up with a single Z range for mountains and gauges isn't likely to work well. A better idea would be to investigate glDepthRange() to isolate the two regimes (this trades ~1 bit in depth buffer precision and allows you two or more completely separated clip plane sets). Or just turn the depth buffer off for the cockpit and sort the geometry; for most cockpit layouts, this should be pretty feasible. It won't work if the cockpit has moving parts (yokes or whatnot) that obscure other pieces. Or just eat the cost and clear the depth buffer between the scenery and aircraft/cockpit. On modern hardware, it's actually not that expensive. Andy -- Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one. - Sting (misquoted) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: FlightGear/src/Main main.cxx,1.245,1.246
Curt wrote: Perhaps we need to do a separate pass for rendering the 3d model and change the near clip plane just for that portion of the rendering. Yes. That should be easy to do. BoB does it as well, they even have 3 or 4 different parts of the geometry that they render with 3 or 4 different near values. Bye bye, Wolfram. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: FlightGear/src/Main main.cxx,1.245,1.246
Andy Ross writes: Or just turn the depth buffer off for the cockpit and sort the geometry; for most cockpit layouts, this should be pretty feasible. It won't work if the cockpit has moving parts (yokes or whatnot) that obscure other pieces. I don't think this is an easy option, at least not with a true 3D model wrapped around the viewer. We'll have to find a more robust solution. To start, I can make the depth buffer 0.1 only when the interior model view is enabled, so no one loses without it; old hardware probably won't do well with the interior view anyway. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: FlightGear/src/Main main.cxx,1.245,1.246
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I don't think this is an easy option, at least not with a true 3D model wrapped around the viewer. We'll have to find a more robust solution. To start, I can make the depth buffer 0.1 only when the interior model view is enabled, so no one loses without it; old hardware probably won't do well with the interior view anyway. Ummm...why not clear the z-buffer and use a seperate scene graph? Note that there are *lots* of people using pre-geforce generation hardware. Probably more than not. Best, Jim ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: FlightGear/src/Main main.cxx,1.245,1.246
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: David, Assuming all of this is being drawn via plib/ssg then you could put all the geometry in a separate ssgRoot node and call ssgCullandDraw() on this root after everything else has been rendered. We have a couple ssgRoot's already so we can have some high level control over sorting geometry ... sky, terrain, lights, cockpit ... Regards, Curt. Please, yes. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: FlightGear/src/Main main.cxx,1.245,1.246
Jim Wilson wrote: Ummm...why not clear the z-buffer and use a seperate scene graph? Note that there are *lots* of people using pre-geforce generation hardware. Probably more than not. Actually, it's those folks who are at risk. Clearing the whole z buffer soaks up big chunks of framebuffer bandwidth, and is a frame rate killer on early hardware. But I agree, it's the simplest and most robust solution. Folks who haven't looked at it before should definitely read the man pages for glDepthRange(). For this situation (the cockpit doesn't need a lot of z precision), it's a good fit. The only worry is that it's a relatively obscure feature and thus more susceptible to driver bugs and incompatibilities. Andy -- Andrew J. RossNextBus Information Systems Senior Software Engineer Emeryville, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.nextbus.com Men go crazy in conflagrations. They only get better one by one. - Sting (misquoted) ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: FlightGear/src/Main main.cxx,1.245,1.246
Jim Wilson writes: Ummm...why not clear the z-buffer and use a seperate scene graph? Note that there are *lots* of people using pre-geforce generation hardware. Probably more than not. Time -- I don't know if I'll have time to figure all that out this week. All the best, David -- David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
