Hi,
osg::LOD have option to use object's size on screen (in pixels?) instead of distance to camera to determine which lod to use, you can try these setting.
Cheers,
Sergey.
10.08.2011, 16:03, "Emmanuel Roche" <[email protected]>:
Hi everyone,
I've have a specific question for which I could use some help/advises:
- I'm quite up-to-date with OSG 3.0.0 and osgEarth current git version
- I'm build an app where I use the osgEarth library to display the earth model.
- When I setup a camera on that model, I use a camera with a very very small field of view (about 0.5 degrees in both horizontal and vertical directions), and my camera is actually far away from the earth model I'm looking at.
- as a result of this, only low resolution tiles are loaded (because the camera distance to the tiles is used to diced what to load or not).
- What I want to do is : to get high resolution tiles displayed around the ground location the camera is pointing at even if it is "physically" far away. then, because (or thanks to?) the small field of view, I would still see the local details on the high res tile textures.
So, any advise how to achieve this ?
- so far I have tried the following:
1. Setup this famous camera just as described before,
2. Add a slave camera, using the earth as child too, but this time, positioned very close to the first camera target point on earth (and looking "down" that point from the local zenith).
Both cameras share the same databasepager (I think) and high res tiles are indeed properly loaded because of the second camera cull traversal. The problem is: I was expecting the loaded tiles to be "shared" by both cameras, yet that is not the case: I still only get the low res tiles displayed by the "far away camera". Is there a way to "share the tiles" as I was expecting ?
- The other main idea I have then would be to find a way to "trick" the cull traversal of the far away camera so that, when traversing pagedLODs the reported distance to the tile would be as if the camera was actually much closer to its target point on the ground. Would that be a good idea ? Any hint on how to proceed then ??
- of course, option 3 would be to actually move the camera to that close location and change the field of view to a bigger value to try to approximate the previous small field of view coverage. But the point is, this camera is meant for a simulator system, and the generated view should not "approximate the actual view", it should really be the same, so computing a new field of view would actually be impossible (or too complex to be worth at least).
cheers,
Manu._______________________________________________
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
