Frederic Bouvier wrote: > Melchior FRANZ wrote: > > > * Jim Wilson -- Sunday 28 March 2004 18:07: > > > FWIW I don't think prop disks and plumes (as they are being done now) > are > > > worth the extra cost. Is there any problem with ignoring this > particular > > > issue for now, or can the triple pass be a separate command line > option? > > > > FWIW I think that this bug has to be fixed, but also that it should be > > a render option. > > > > http://perso.wanadoo.fr/frbouvi/flightsim/fg-multip-off-2.jpg > > I am leaning to a 4 level quality choice : > > 0 - actual state : clouds are making holes in mountains when seen from > below, translucent surfaces are making hole in clouds underneath.
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/frbouvi/flightsim/fg-multip-lvl0.jpg > 1 - clouds are blended with mountains http://perso.wanadoo.fr/frbouvi/flightsim/fg-multip-lvl1.jpg > 2 - translucent aircraft surfaces are blended with clouds but with > problem with underlying 3d static objects ( clouds between the > propeller disc and 3d objects are not seen ) > > 3 - total correctness http://perso.wanadoo.fr/frbouvi/flightsim/fg-multip-lvl2-1.jpg the propeller disc doesn't appear well on overcast so the same over broken to show that it is still there : http://perso.wanadoo.fr/frbouvi/flightsim/fg-multip-lvl2-2.jpg > Perhaps 2 and 3 can be collapsed with no extra cost. Yes, they can, it is just a matter of drawing the aircraft after the other models In this area of the world, there is no impact on framerate with my hardware setup. At KSFO though, the difference is real. -Fred _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
