Hi Henri, > However your approach is questionable. > I can understand you are working on an other FlightGear "variant" for > yourself. (...) > It is not the Atmospheric Light Scattering, we want.
Who is the 'we' you're claiming to represent? I look at the FGUK weekly flight screenshots in the forum, and pretty much everyone there is using ALS. I look at some recent scenery projects (Russia, New Zealand) - and I see people playing with the procedural texturing of ALS. So *you* may not want it, but you're not representing 'the community', you're representing yourself here. And you know what? You can simply never switch it on if you don't like it, and that solves it all. It's a bit beyond me how you could possibly be bothered by a feature you currently actively have to switch on. (And even if I were the only person interested in using it, it would still be perfectly legitimate for me to work on what interests me rather than the rest of the users - this is my spare time we're talking about.) > You call it Atmospheric Light Scattering, you could call it > Renk ALS I could at that, but it's handed out to the community under GPL, so it doesn't belong to me, it belongs to whoever adheres to GPL. > We want, so far, a consistent flightgear system, any features should be > compatible each other, and not breaking each other. First, you haven't read what I wrote: There is nothing 'broken' by ALS - everything you're using when ALS is off works just the same as if you would remove the whole framework (if you disagree, name me a single Rembrandt feature that doesn't work any more because ALS blocks it). The only implementation which actually prefers Basic Weather consistently over Advanced Weather (and hence in a sense breaks things, although one can to some extend hack around it) is the environment interface of the default (and Rembrandt) rendering framework - which is designed by the very person who brought up the idea that I would break things. Second, you're applying double standards here. Rembrandt (which you like) is massively incompatible with the default rendering framework at a much deeper level. It requires to modify aircraft to even see through cockpits, it requires likewise to re-write every effect and shader. You seem to have zero issue with this, but taking your argument seriously, you would have to be against Rembrandt. Of course you personally like Rembrandt but not ALS, so it's okay if Rembrandt is incompatible with the default, but not ALS - I don't have a particularly high opinion of such types of arguments. > What about Rembrandt ? To reproduce the reality, isn't it the main tool > which > gives the best effect ? Won't the effort should done on that side ? What you're asking is really 'I like Rembrandt better, so why don't you work on it?' Let me ask you back - I like ALS better, so why don't you ask FredB to work on ALS instead? Makes just as much sense. As for Rembrandt being superior, Rembrandt is a different engine, not a set of different effects. As such, it has more potential, because it can potentially do the same things ALS can do and still add multiple light sources and shadows. As has been mentioned a few times, ALS can be ported to Rembrandt by re-writing the effects, but this isn't something I am personally so interested in that I would do it completely on my own, and unless a volunteer appears to do it with me, that's all there is to say. Currently I would claim that ALS delivers more realistic outside scenes at daytime and at sunrise/sunset, whereas Rembrandt wins for aircraft interior, close to the ground when shadows are important and at night where multiple light sources are important. > I hope that the next Flightgear version will offer a consistent system > and not several independents systems ( including your Flightgear) which won't > be > compatible each other. I hope you have the fairness to ask FredB to remove Rembrandt then as well, because we need to ship the default rendering scheme such that users without good graphics cards (the integrated intels for instance) can use FG at all, and neither Rembrandt not ALS are compatible with default. I mean, what is this really about? You're seriously bothered by a framework you especially have to activate, which doesn't break any of the features you like to the degree that you blatantly ignore the significant group of users who uses ALS and claim to represent 'the community' and invent 'broken things' for which you can't give a single example'? And you expect me to... do what? Code what you like instead of what I like? Please... can we keep some basic fairness and decency here? * Thorsten ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_apr _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
