Jim Wilson wrote:
Lee Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Changing the model would stop that working of course, as the geometry would've
changed, but it's a quick and simple way of getting a 'lite' (er) version of
a model, at least with regard to texture space requirements.
Using the "reduce" function in ac3d and deleting a few objects I was able to
reduce the 747 model almost 80% without remapping textures at all. Note that
you have to experiment with reducing different parts of the model different
percentages (the ctrl+z comes in handy for this kind of experimenting :-)).
The result is
a little rough up close, but from a couple hundred meters viewing distance it
looks pretty much the same.
Screen shot:
http://www.spiderbark.com/fgfs/747reduced.png
Best,
Jim
That model looks great! Although we had even more primitive model for
greater distances (no textures, some aircrafts had even common this
model, because of the similar shape) in Falcon. If you ask me, we
shouldn't use textures greater than 128*128 when viewing aircraft
farther than 1 mile.
Can you please tell me the comparison between the number of
vertices/polygons/textures before and after optimization?
|
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
