Hi Josh
I posted on this subject a couple of weeks ago.... there was some discussion
as to where the "scaling" of the texture was done Terragear/FlightGear.
There were two points;
1) ... when viewed from above a 45deg slope will only seem 0.7071 of its
true length. Hence a "stretching" issue when viewed from the side.
2) ... the current terrain is designed to be seen from above... When viewing
terrain from the side other factors come into play...your stratum idea and
the one I put forward where urban terrain is presently designed from a
"birds eye view" ie roof's, when this is viewed from the side it should be
walls and windows, the roofs always being on the uphill side. This implies
left and right handed scenery amongst other perspective issues.
Sort of associated with your river issue is the issue of railways and the
sections of railways that are through tunnels.... this particularly effects
me as two of the longest rail tunnels in the southern hemisphere are in my
local area and it looks silly to have them placed on the surface climbing
60deg slopes .... I have talked to Fred about being able to resolve this in
FGSD but no firm answer yet.
Cheers
Dene
From: Josh Babcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I. Currently the terrain textures are UV mapped onto the terrain from
directly above. This creates all sorts of problems in steep terrain. One
of those problems is that cliffs and near cliffs look really bad.
Perhaps if terrain with a slope greater than a certain threshold were to
be mapped from the side with a texture bearing strata this particular
case would start to look right. What would be involved in making
particular terrain types be mapped differently?
II. Another thing I have been thinking about since the new scenery was
released is flattening rivers. The new algorithm certainly makes places
like the Grand Canyon look a lot more like they should, but there are
still a lot of rivers that travel up and down like roller coasters.
Perhaps if once the linear database is in sync with the elevation data
it would be a good idea to tell the algorithm where the rivers are so it
can increase the number of vertecies along the rivers. On the other
hand, maybe simply getting the linear feature data in the same place as
the elevation data will be all that it takes.
A really smart algorithm would also be able to see when it is laying
down a river on a slope and move it to the bottom of the valley. It
might even be able to figure out the registration error between the two
datasets this way and automatically adjust for that.
Josh
_________________________________________________________________
Need more speed? Get Xtra Broadband @
http://jetstream.xtra.co.nz/chm/0,,202853-1000,00.html
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
