Hi Dirk,
> > what about Shadow Volumes in OpenSG 2.0? If I > > remember correctly someone was suggesting that > > as a new feature for OpenSG 2.0 in the past. > > Is anybody actually planning to add that? I saw > > that feature in GizomSDK, very nice! > In general shadow maps are more efficient (IMHO), unless you put serious > effort into optimizing the shadow volumes. There was anice paper at the Yes they are indeed very efficient. But we often run into a quality problem. The worst things are huge scenes containing very detailed objects. Consider a supermarket, you'll end up mapping a shadow map pixel on a whole product within the supermarket.... I whish I had shadow volumes in such a case (and I won't care for frame rates). > I3D a few years ago that looked very good, but quite a bit of effort. > The only big advantage is the quality of volumes, they are very sharp > shadows. But with good map algorithms like the new ShadowViewport you > can get pretty good quality, too. Yea, of course that's not easy to do, I know... Was just checking if there's any serious effort/project in implementing that. > > http://www.gizmosdk.com/ > > > > Speaking of gizmo... Did you see the new "clustering" > > support? It's not as smart as OpenSG's but they are > > catching up! > > I couldn't find anything about that. They do support multipage TerraPage > servers now, but that's just for data paging and has nothing to do with > the scenegraph per se. Can you point at some information about that? Sorry, it's apparently still not official. You can see it in the news section for the beta version: 15 March 2006 GizmoSDK 1.3 beta 20: * Distributed Scene Graph * Extensive TerraPage updates * Multi Host databases * OFL Mesh format updates * New font system I exchanged some emails with Anders Modén, the CTO of GizmoSDK. BTW he gave some interesting interviews where he mentions OpenSG and OSG, read more here: http://www.modsim.org/Articles/GizmoSDK/GizmoSDKInterview.pdf#search=%22Ande rs%20Mod%C3%A9n%20opensg%22 Anyway, in those emails he roughly explained to me the distributed scene graph concept, here are two snippets: --------------------------- > > That sounds like a lot of work, I'll probably have to look at an > > example. Do you have some very small tutorial example about this > > topic? > > Nope. But here is how you do it.. > > 1. Create and instance of a gzWindowSyncControl on the main machine 2. > issue gzWindowSyncControl::run() to start a demo loop of > (startRender() and swapBuffers()) > > .. > > 3. Set up a gzWindowSync instance on each render hw 4. issue > gzWindowSync::addWindow(your window); 5. issue gzWindowSync::run() > > .. > > Now you can swap all clients using the > gzWindowSyncControl::(startRender() > and swapBuffers() --------------------------------------------------------- > Sounds good. So the geometry is distributed transparently? Not by default. You have a couple of options to do it. 1. Set up a web server or a purl server (a gizmo runtime data distributor) and use http or purl urls in your filename of the scenegraph 2. use GizmoDistribution to "pack" graphics data into distributable objects. For a non dynamic world the alt 1 is the easiest way. But then you will not be able to control rotations, animations etc for distributed objects. By using option 2 you can set the rotation of a node in the scene graph and it will be transferred into a distibuted call that will update the scene on all displays. This is the true distributed scene. ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Opensg-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users
