On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Renk Thorsten wrote: >> As part of that I think I need to make some changes to the Basic >> Weather to populate the appropriate properties. Thorsten - are the >> properties documented anywhere? > > No, not really :-( But I can write a summary for you.
If you have the time, that would be great, I guess I can probably guess by going through all the effects files in turn and tracing properties through uniforms, but getting it "straight from the horses mouth" would be more efficient. >> I'm very keen that the atmospheric light scattering and procedural >> effects are merged fully into both the "classic" and Rembrandt >> renderers, and would absolutely be part of any team effort to make it >> happen. I'd really like to get to a position where the Atmospheric >> Lighting checkbox in the Rendering dialog can be removed, as the >> elements of the atmospheric renderer are simply part of the classic >> and Rembrandt rendering schemes. > > I'm not sure if that is a good idea. Even the 'bare' atmospheric > scattering (just atmosphere and light, no terrain shader effects) has a > drastic performance impact on older systems as compared to the classic > scheme (on my old system, it brought me from ~50 to ~20 fps). So we > might want to continue offering a computationally cheap rendering > scheme, which the classic is. We'll still offer the computationally cheap rendering scheme - that's what setting the quality slider to 0 should be for > Then, there are genuine differences in the philosophy of some effects, in > which alternatives are now available. Personally I'm not a fan of the classic > landmass and slope/inverse slope transition effects - so I introduced > something else. > This can't easily be 'merged' - either we abandon one set of effects (but > then, > there are people who like the other set) or we make them available as > alternatives - > in which case you end up with a different checkbox. I must admit that I'd forgotten about the landmass shader. I never have it switched on as it's incompatible with the object/vegetation masking which I value more. it does handling tiling artifacts very well, but perhaps we can address them with the work you've been doing? Out of interest, do lots of people on this list use the landmass shader? For the slope/transition effects we should settle on one version and remove the other. I suggest you write a summary of the advantages of yours, along with some comparison screenshots, and if anyone wants to argue the other way they can do the same. > I guess we need to discuss just what we want to impement: > > Based on how we do the light, we have > > 1) Rembrandt (multiple light sources) > 2) Atmospheric light scattering (only one light source, but with > position/time differential > light computations) > 3) classic (only one light source computed for the whole scene) > 4) a future Rembrandt + atmospheric light scattering (time/position > differential light > computations for the sun + multiple secondary light sources) > > Based on how we render terrain we have > > a) the classic set of effects (slope transition, landmass,...) > b) the procedural texturing set of effects (de-tiling, hires overlay, > dust/autumn/vegetation..., > closeup bumpmapping, grain overlay,...) > > That gives all in all 8 possible rendering frameworks, out of which currently > 1a), 2b) and > 3a) exist. I was talking about creating 4b) (or maybe 4a) ) - you seem to > have something else in mind (?) I'm thinking of 2b and 4b, but using the quality slider properties such that a quality=0 is the same as 3a. As James has said - we should be able to make this scalable. >> - AI Tanker enhancements to allow users to select from a range of >> tanker models. This is particularly relevant for naval probe-equipped >> aircraft, where there is a much greater variety of tanker types. > > Could we also tighten the envelope in which we receive fuel? I did AAR with > the F-16 yesterday, and my tanks were basically full by the time I had > reached the actual refueling position... I started getting contact ~50 m away > from the tanker ?! I was already planning to make the refuelling point configured on a per-tanker basis, as obviously different aircraft have different (sometimes multiple) refuelling positions. It sounds like it would be worth having a slide to allow the user to configure how large the envelope is as well. -Stuart ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET, C# 2012, HTML5, CSS, MVC, Windows 8 Apps, JavaScript and much more. Keep your skills current with LearnDevNow - 3,200 step-by-step video tutorials by Microsoft MVPs and experts. SALE $99.99 this month only -- learn more at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122912 _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
