Le lundi 13 juin 2005 à 12:58 +0200, Melchior FRANZ a écrit : > * Gerard Robin -- Monday 13 June 2005 12:21: > > Le lundi 13 juin 2005 à 10:29 +0200, Erik Hofman a écrit : > > > How would you all feel about making the "old" Haris' 3d clouds code > > > obsolete by now? > > > We must keep it, with Metar it is the most Representative of the real > > weather the new 3D clouds is beautiful only. > > Both the "old" 2D clouds (note the "TWO") and the new 3D clouds consider > METAR. > The old 3D clouds that Erik is talking about do AFAIK not. They are ugly and > broken, and aren't representative for anything. It sounds as if you are mixing > up 2D and 3D. > > m. > Oh sorry if you mean _bumped_ clouds it can be removed. We must be able to choose between normal clouds and new 3D clouds, because, with Metar, when i look at the windows (you probably can do it :-) ), i worry, i see a sky which is nearly the same than that i have on my screen, and an other sky with new 3D clouds. I do not contest that new 3D Clouds takes in account Metar, up to now, it is not able to give the real picture. (that could be probably improved).
You could understand that i must, now, be careful when i give my opinion, since the _JSB_crash_handling_affair_ which makes for me crash down many hours of work.( to keep it i must run with a permanent patched fg). But i get off the main subject... OK!! > -- Gerard _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
