Hi Tim & James, > De: "James Turner" > > On 20 Jul 2012, at 07:22, Tim Moore wrote: > > > We could use the stencil buffer without copying anything: render > > the near scene first, setting stencil bits, then enable the stencil > > test for the far scene. I believe that the stencil test has been > > extremely fast for years. > > Oooh, yes - I was forgetting the cameras are rendering to the same > buffers. > > That seems like some low-hanging fruit indeed!
Rembrandt can't use a scheme where the depth buffer is cleared in between because it rely on it to compute positions. But it exhibits depth buffer precision problems too, especially when computing lights (if the light volume is too tight, it can miss to intersect the terrain). So I was thinking of playing with depth ranges : the far camera renders with a range [0.5..1] and then the near camera renders with the range [0..0.5]. I think this could be unified with the classical renderer. What do you think about that ? Regards, -Fred ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
