David Megginson writes: > This is a great idea, but it will make the memory problem even worse, > at least until I have a chance to implement the suggestion in my last > posting. > > > I moved the code that creates the object LOD node over to obj.cxx > > where the object is actually positioned. Now every instance of every > > 'random' object has it's own unique LOD node. The LOD range is > > calculated as range/(random(0,1)*range) + range. > > > > So if the specified object range was 2000m you would get a > > distribution that follows the form of 1/x. The minimum range would be > > 2000m, but a few would be much higher than that. > > That sounds like an excellent idea.
I tweaked the random distribution a bit, but feel free to play with the formula and coefficients. > > The visual result is that you'd get a few objects way out in the > > distance and then others would fill in between more and more as you > > got closer in. It looks very similar to what you had originally but > > with a bit more variety and a few interesting objects in the distance, > > and there isn't a 'hard line' where all the objects pop in. You still > > see popping but it is maybe a slight fraction less noticable. > > > > I think this change makes the random objects look really good. Do you > > mind if I commit them (you can always back them out if you don't like > > them, or think of a better way do do this.) > > Sure, you can either commit it now, before I start working on the > memory problem, or wait a day or two (or more) for my restructuring. Ok, before I forget all about the changes, I have committed them. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson IVLab / HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt http://www.flightgear.org _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
