On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 20:17 +0100, Robert Osfield wrote: > Hi Robert, > > Nicolas nicely sumerised what I normally write in a couple of hundred > lines, in your case you certainly have multiple independent views - > the main view and the HUD view are conceptually different, so > naturally these would lead to your suggestion 3 - i.e. using > CompositeViewer. > > In the case of HUD's you can just be a bit more lazy and treat the HUD > as just an overlay and not really a full view in its own right - so > conceptually you'd tell yourself you have one main view and just a bit > of decoration on top, in which case you make an excuse for using a > slave camera and use a standard Viewer. Viewer is only slightly more > straight forward to work with than CompositeViewer so that there isn't > really much to gain from this. > > Personally I would not recommend stick a HUD into a scene graph any > more, as conceptually it's harder to claim that a HUD is part of the > scene, however, there are some cases where you might actually want a
This raises an interesting question, Robert. osgWidget can easily use Viewer or CompositeViewer (it really just needs an osgViewer::View* for computeIntersections()), but throughout the examples and whatnot I normally just use a standard Viewer. Should I begin encouraging use of CompositeViewer instead, just as a kind of "good development practice" thing? > HUD saved and loaded along with the rest of the scene graph, so again > here you might want to bend the rules a little ;-) I'm currently implementing DotOsgWrapper proxy objects for all of osgWidget. I'm not pretending this will act as a fully-serialized "state dump" of an interface at any given time, but it will at least allow you to dump some semblance of your UI and view it in text form--or even load it in a perspective view to see how Windows and whatnot are layered... > Since there is the same Camera setup required for almost all of these > configurations it's actually not too hard to jump from one set up to > the next so if you do go down one route then decide against it it > shouldn't be too hard to refactor. > > Robert. > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Robert Balfour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > My present osg app configuration is a single view on a single > > window/screen, with a hud camera overlay, which I simply added to the > > scenegraph with a high renderbin#. > > > > Looking at osgHud example, it seems that this can also be configured by > > adding the hud camera as a slave cam to the view. Or using Composite > > viewer, adding the hud cam as a second view. > > > > Now if I go to reconfigure my app to work over two or more > > windows/screens, which approach would be better: > > (1)multiple cameras in the scenegraph, > > (2)slave cameras on a single view, or > > (3)multiple views (using composite viewer)? > > > > I'm leaning towards (3). > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > Bob. > > -- > > Robert E. Balfour, Ph.D. > > Exec. V.P. & CTO, BALFOUR Technologies LLC > > 960 South Broadway, Suite 108, Hicksville NY 11801 > > Phone: (516)513-0030 Fax: (516)513-0027 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _______________________________________________ > > osg-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org > > > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org > _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
