Jimmy,
That's quite some machine you're running on! ;-) You say the scene works
fine in VRML - by that I infer that the VRML viewer is not written in
Java...
As far as I know there is no inherent limit built into Java 3D (but
"insiders" may know better).
Is the JVM itself running out of memory loading the textures? You could try
increasing the size of the JVM memory pool via the -Xms/Xmx command line
argument to "java".
http://www-4.ibm.com/software/developer/library/tip-heap-size.html
A Win32 VRML viewer would not be subject to this limitation and could access
any of the virtual address space. They may also be sampling your textures
down to 256x256 - for computability reasons. It is comparatively recent that
cards support such large texture images.
Also ensure that you are not instructing Java 3D to store unnecessary
channels for each texture image (like alpha) which could mean you are
storing more information in the Java 3D version. I guess you should also
double check that you are not yourself keeping references to the texture
images, because Java 3D will copy them internally.
Again, just some thoughts.
Sincerely,
Daniel Selman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.tornadolabs.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion list for Java 3D API
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jimmy Talbot
> Sent: 29 January 2000 20:00
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [JAVA3D] texture memory limit
>
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Thanks for your response.
>
> > By my calculation your application uses over 39 MB for storing
> textures (and
> > that's 8 bit textures!). Considering that most video cards have
> between 8
> > and 16 MB for texture memory I'd expect pretty horrible performance (at
> > best!). There is a good chance that the JVM ran out of memory also.
>
> OH yes -- no question about it, it's a memory-hungry application. However,
> note that I did mention that the application works fine in VRML (ie, same
> geometry, same textures, on the same machine). So this tells me that the
> machine can definitely handle the application. It's an SGI Visual PC, with
> 512 MB RAM, I think it was configured for 65 MB video memory and 457 MB
> for application memory.
>
> So knowing all the above (and assuming that I really do need 512x512
> textures :^)), my question still is: does Java3D have an inherent limit on
> the amount of texture that can be used?
>
> Also, since I am obviously not displaying all 150 textures at 512x512 at
> once, would it be better in this case to use mipmaps or not? If the reason
> why some textures were not showing up was because Java3D can only handle
> so many MB of textures internally, then using mipmaps will only make the
> problem worse -- as mipmaps would obviously take more RAM (though less
> video memory when the smaller textures are displayed).
>
> Jimmy
>
> ==================================================================
> =========
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include
> in the body
> of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff JAVA3D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
