On Fri, 30 Nov 2001 05:04, you wrote: > Curtis L. Olson writes: > > - At one point we were playing around with 1024x1024 textures but > > consider that a single RGB texture at that resolution with > > mipmapping turned on can consume about 6Mb of your cards RAM so I > > think in general we should shoot for 256x256 resolution ground cover > > textures for general distribution. > > An alternative is to stick with 256x256 but allow the textures to > cover a larger area. I experimented with 5km x 5km and even 10km x > 10km textures, and the effect is *much* better from altitude, since it > eliminates most of the repetition. They look pretty bad under 1,000ft > AGL, but from about 3000' AGL up (i.e. where you'll be almost all the > time) there's no obvious blurriness at all.
I think we may have to get creative with a system of microtexturing. Have some textures for low altitude, then others for high altitude. I'm not sure how we could get them to be seamless, and give correct perspective, but it's something worth thinking about. Also maybe we could use the compression features on some of these video cards. David _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
