Nicolas schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> I propose my first tries... still much work to get a good
> implementation.
>
> >From the README (into path) :
> -
>
> This first try permits to add a basic snow and rain effects in using
> particle from OSG.
>
> For the moment, the patch uses
On Sunday 10 February 2008 18:10, Tim Moore wrote:
>
> I think you have an old version of OpenThreads around.
>
> Tim
>
Hi Tim,
Yes, looks like that's what's happening. Thanks,
Durk
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Micro
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:20:24 +0100
Georg Vollnhals <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Syd,
>
> you know that I am not complaining? I am just feeling like a Beta-Tester
> doing some helping work to improve the stuff.
> If you agree with me, there are a lot of things to discuss - but I just
> want to
Am Sonntag, 10. Februar 2008 14:57 schrieb Maik Justus:
> That was my problem. I placed this file in my $FGROOT/data directory.
> (Maybe this would be the better place for that? For no other extension I
> had to install any data in the home directory. And the home directory is
> not within the cvs-
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 13:48:48 +
LeeE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...I sometimes work on 3D 'art' pictures.
>
> http://www.spatial.plus.com/V5/im_WoodenDream-001-006.jpg
>
> Is my latest effort.
>
> There are a few aspects of it that I'd like to improve and I might
> come back to it at some
Hi,
I propose my first tries... still much work to get a good
implementation.
>From the README (into path) :
-
This first try permits to add a basic snow and rain effects in using
particle from OSG.
For the moment, the patch uses the METAR informations to enable /
di
At Monday 11 February 2008 14:48:48 LeeE wrote:
> ...I sometimes work on 3D 'art' pictures.
>
> http://www.spatial.plus.com/V5/im_WoodenDream-001-006.jpg
>
> Is my latest effort.
>
> There are a few aspects of it that I'd like to improve and I might
> come back to it at some point, but it'll do for
Syd&Sandy schrieb:
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 03:47:26 +0100
> Georg Vollnhals <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>
>
> Hi Georg , the tree problem is because I created a set of 8 instead of 4
> trees per texture for the
> coniferous trees , and the originally commented out parts of the material.
--- Csaba Halász wrote:
> On Feb 11, 2008 11:05 AM, Stuart Buchanan
> wrote:
> >
> > I'm sure we can think of some more.
> >
> > If we could define these regions based on lat/lon (in an XML file?), FG
> > could
> set
> > them, and they could be easily used within materials.xml.
>
> Needs more i
On Monday 11 February 2008 13:59, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Thomas Förster -- Monday 11 February 2008:
> > At least I think conservative is the right term.
>
> Oh, I didn't think that it was wrongly used. It's just that
> the decision was meant to be reasonable for the case
> based on logical
Heiko Schulz wrote:
> Another thing is, when I increase the visibility
> manually I noticed with the last OSG-version that
> there is a white surface in the sky - the blue sky
> disapears, no stars.
>
>
I noticed this when trying to get new screenshots in osg, I could no
longer get a clear-da
> But I like the idea to make an educated guess based on
> other METAR values, and I plan to implement that later
> today. I'll use a large set of stored METAR messages with
> specified (i.e. non- or M*) visibility to see which
> elements (other than humidity) have a correlation with the
> visi
* Thomas Förster -- Monday 11 February 2008:
> At least I think conservative is the right term.
Oh, I didn't think that it was wrongly used. It's just that
the decision was meant to be reasonable for the case
based on logical considerations, and not the least on whether
it would be (seen as)
...I sometimes work on 3D 'art' pictures.
http://www.spatial.plus.com/V5/im_WoodenDream-001-006.jpg
Is my latest effort.
There are a few aspects of it that I'd like to improve and I might
come back to it at some point, but it'll do for now.
This image took ~9 hours to render (including post-pr
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 10:05:20 + (GMT)
Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>
> I have been thinking for a while that it would be good to have some way
> to have a finer granularity within materials.xml.
>
> For example:
> - Towns and villages in different countries/continents are quite
> different in terms
On Feb 11, 2008 11:05 AM, Stuart Buchanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm sure we can think of some more.
>
> If we could define these regions based on lat/lon (in an XML file?), FG could
> set
> them, and they could be easily used within materials.xml.
Needs more invasive changes to the code.
Am Montag 11 Februar 2008 schrieb Melchior FRANZ:
> ...
> > Think someone did a conservative choice here.
>
> Conservative?
http://dict.leo.org/forum/viewWrongentry.php?idThread=427767&idForum=3&lp=ende&lang=de
Sorry for the long url. Its in German too...
At least I think conservative is the ri
--- Csaba Halász wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2008 12:29 PM, Vivian Meazza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I would be pleasantly surprised if worked in materials.xml
>
> Here you go :)
>
> As a side effect, we could get rid of the ugly code that makes
> "Terrain." out of "Terrain" at the expense of som
--- Melchior FRANZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> * Heiko Schulz -- Monday 11 February 2008:
> > Even with a visibility more than 30m I can't see
> much impact.
>
> Well, 30m isn't much. No impact here, either. :-}
>
>
>
> * Stuart Buchanan -- Monday 11 February 2008:
> > I'm sure you alreay
* Heiko Schulz -- Monday 11 February 2008:
> Even with a visibility more than 30m I can't see much impact.
Well, 30m isn't much. No impact here, either. :-}
* Stuart Buchanan -- Monday 11 February 2008:
> I'm sure you alreay know the answer : Make it a property value in
> preferences.xml, defa
--- Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Thomas Förster -- Monday 11 February 2008:
> > Note that METAR itself only codes visibility up to m.
>
> Only if it uses the 4-digit visibility code. But it can also be
> something like "KEDW 110755Z 24006KT 45SM SCT250 04/M01 A3014"
> where the visibility is 45
--- Melchior FRANZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> * Thomas Förster -- Monday 11 February 2008:
> > Note that METAR itself only codes visibility up to
> m.
>
> Only if it uses the 4-digit visibility code. But it
> can also be
> something like "KEDW 110755Z 24006KT 45SM SCT250
> 04/M01 A3014"
* Thomas Förster -- Monday 11 February 2008:
> Note that METAR itself only codes visibility up to m.
Only if it uses the 4-digit visibility code. But it can also be
something like "KEDW 110755Z 24006KT 45SM SCT250 04/M01 A3014"
where the visibility is 45SM ... 45 (statute) miles.
> Everyth
Am Sonntag 10 Februar 2008 schrieb Heiko Schulz:
> ...
> It seems to mee, that METAR is not used correctly.
> METAR ssems alright to me, if in RL the visibility is
> under 11nm, ti is in FGFS too. But above 11nm - FGFS
> can't show this
Note that METAR itself only codes visibility up to m
24 matches
Mail list logo
