Hi all, Generalizing my 3 pass logic on a group of models, it seems I don't get the expected result.
Let me ask a question. In the following case :
am I correct if I assume the rendering order will be A1-A2-...-An-B-A1(with B
context)-A2(with B context)-...-An(with B context)-C-A1(with C context)-A2(with
C context)-...-An(with C context) , in each {A1-A2-...-An} sequence, precise
order being unassumable ?
By "with B context" I mean "having stateset attributes inherited from B
stateset ones".
If not, what would be a correct way to give rise to this render order ??
Thanks for any teaching about this.
--
Christophe Médard
Société OKTAL (http://www.oktal.fr)
2 impasse Boudeville
31100 Toulouse (France)
Tél. : (+33) 5 62 11 50 10
Fax : (+33) 5 62 11 50 29
----- Original Message -----
From: Christophe Medard
To: OpenSceneGraph Users
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: [osg-users] RenderingHint vs binNumber(RenderBinDetails)
Yop,
All right, Tim's right.
So to conclude :
- setRenderingHint is just a shortcut for setRenderBinDetails, it allows not to
have to specify the name of bin type, and _renderingHint is useless (for those
making inquiries on the OSG source)
- indeed, the binNumber is the draw order number against other children in the
parent Group, evaluated in a left-first traversall logic.
The draw order for this case (3 pass on an geode) is A-B-C. It works well, one
just have to beware of z-fighting, through the reuse of the depth buffer of the
1st pass (via setAttributeAndModes(new
osg::Depth(osg::Depth::EQUAL,0.0,1.0,false) for example).
|
osg::Group "Root"
|
-----------------------------------
| | |
| | |
| osg::Group "B" osg::Group "C"
| [binNumber = 20] [binNumber = 30]
| | |
----------------------------------
|
osg::Geode "A"
[binNumber = 15]
Thanks to all.
<<Question_about_bins.jpg>>
_______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
