Selon Curtis Olson : > On Jan 7, 2008 3:51 PM, Frederic Bouvier <> wrote: > > > If we keep the same triangle budget for every tile, we will have sparse > > data and > > features at the equator and much more than what is really needed at the > > poles, > > just because the area covered by each tile will vary greatly ( > > proportional to > > 1/cos( lat ) if my math is ok ) > > > My gut feeling is that once you get up (or down) into the latittudes where > the tiles get significantly skinny, the resolution of the available data > drops of significantly. We really don't have a per-tile triangle budget > anyway. The only place where I see this making a difference is the > concentration of terrain elevation points would increase, but this is up in > an area where we only have very low res terrain data anyway. SRTM drops out > beyond +/- 60 degrees latitude.
I was thinking about the parameter we pass to "Terra" to simplify the initial grid. IIRC, this parameter is always the same, leaving all *.arr.gz files with the same number of vertices. -Fred -- Frédéric Bouvier http://frfoto.free.fr Photo gallery - album photo http://www.fotolia.fr/p/2278/partner/2278 Other photo gallery http://fgsd.sourceforge.net/ FlightGear Scenery Designer ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
