Antonio Bleile wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I know very little about FBO's, I was looking
> for an alternative to pbuffers, so I found the
> FBO stuff. The test in OpenSG suggests that the
> FBO is bound to the Window:
>
> rAct->setWindow(win.getCPtr());
> fbo_vp->render(rAct);
> fbo_vp->setParent(NullFC);
>
> So basically it seems to me as a TextureGrabForeground.
> What's the difference between the two?
>   
* The FBOViewport is a Viewport that renders directly to textures. It 
can have it's own background/foregrounds.
* The TextureGrabForeground copies the framebuffer contents (rendered 
via a regular Viewport) to a texture.

But yes, there is some overlap between the two. FBO:s where introduced 
to simplify things and minimize resource usage when rendering to texture.
> Another thing I'd like to know is if I can
> replace a pbuffer with an fbo in the sense that
> I'd like to really render stuff offscreen. But
> it seems to me that the FBO is bound to the 
> Window and thus to the gl context.... Right?
>   
Correct. However, there is no a contradicition. An FBO is more efficient 
in that it uses the same gl context as your Window, but render directly 
to textures without copy.

Cheers,
/Marcus


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Opensg-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users

Reply via email to