Paul Surgeon writes: > I'm sure this subject has been brought up plenty of times but I think it would > be great to compile a list of all the features that we need the FG terrain > rendering system to support. > > I want to keep this to features only - lets forget about the implementation > for the moment so we can at least get everyone's ideas down without having 50 > emails of "it can't be done like this" or "must be done like that". > Let's make a comprehensive list first and then discuss the HOWTO's afterwards. > Maybe we can even come up with a roadmap!!! :-P > > My list : > > 1. LOD algorithm/system (with adjustable radius for high and low end users) > The current irregular grid mesh works but it's not very efficient and we could > get much better framerates with a nice LOD system. Alternatively much higher > elevation resolution with similar framerates. > > 2. Texture overlays - FG scenery engine does the chopping and texture co-ord > generation. (I won't go into details but this would greatly simplify LOD > algorithms) > > Your list :
I'll add in a few things: - Ability to cut in polygon models of airports. - Ability to page terrain / textures so continuous flights around the world are still possible. - Ability to populate the world with arbitrary additional 3d objects. Note that our current ability to populate the world with random objects would not work with the new scheme. We'd need to completely overhaul that functionality to work in a photo texture drapped, LOD terrain world. - Care should be taken with object vertical placement so the terrain LOD doesn't move the 3d objects up and down noticable. And also so it doesn't noticably bury objects or float objects when the terrain LOD changes. - I assume all the current 2d polygon data would go away since this would be better represented by the photo texture overlay anyway. I bet we'll run into other things, but if you are serious about making a stab at this, then I will propose that we a) find a way to do it in parallel to the current system and b) just jump in and start going. I don't think it's realistic to have your first pass encapsulate *all* current functionality of the scenery subsystem. And there will most likely be things we don't consider until we get hit over the head with it. I can think of different situations where each approach would be more optimal than the other, so it probably wouldn't hurt to have more than one way to do things. Best regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olson HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Cities curt 'at' me.umn.edu curt 'at' flightgear.org Minnesota http://www.flightgear.org/~curt http://www.flightgear.org _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
