On Wednesday 23 July 2003 20:27, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> David Megginson writes:
> > It's in docs/Model/fgfs-model-howto.html.  You have to check out the
> > docs module of FlightGear to get it, though, since it's not part of
> > the main source distro.  When I have time, I'd like to get it into the
> > Wiki.
> 
> Ok, I have added a section to this document for the scale animation
> type.  (note, it really should be expanded since most of the animation
> types didn't exist when it was originally written.)
> 
> One possible work around for plib's non-support of the scaling
> operation is to build the object at it's maximum size and always make
> it smaller.
> 
> Plib's view frustum culling scheme works by building bounding spheres
> around each object.  It isn't able to compute how a scale operation
> will change the effective size of the object (tough problem to be
> fair) and so it will do the culling based on the original object size.
> 
> This means that if you scale you object larger and the space occupied
> by the original object goes out of view, your entire object will
> disappear (this is bad.)
> 
> However if you start with a big object and scale it smaller, the
> scaled version will always live inside the original bounding sphere,
> so you will not have the same sort of drop outs ... only a possible
> inefficiency since the object could be drawn even when it's smaller
> version is entirely outside the view frustum (because the originally
> sized object could still be inside the view frustum.)
> 
> So a work around at this point would be to build your object at it's
> maximum size and then always scale it smaller.
> 
> What do you think Lee, can you work with this?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Curt.
> -- 
> Curtis Olson   IVLab / HumanFIRST Program       FlightGear Project
> Twin Cities    curt 'at' me.umn.edu             curt 'at' flightgear.org
> Minnesota      http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt   http://www.flightgear.org

I think it should work ok for the landing light scenario where you're not 
doing aerobatics and you're over fairly flat ground.

I would've thought that a smaller bounding sphere would be better than a big 
bounding sphere for this - would there not be a greater chance of drop outs 
with a big bounding sphere due to the greater volume increasing the likely 
hood of intersecting something?  I might be misunderstanding this though.

Another posibility to try is to increase the poly count and design of the 
object.  With the shadow I just used a simple rectangle (after I triangulated 
it).  For a landing light, perhaps a polar type mesh might be better.

Too much speculation and not enough trying out:)

LeeE


_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to