Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
On Freitag 17 Juni 2005 09:59, Erik Hofman wrote: Are we sure that the pbuffer extension initialization/usage is entierly correct? It should be, The RenderTexture code is adapted from the RenderTexture class written by Mark Harris: http://www.markmark.net/misc/rendertexture.html http://gpgpu.sourceforge.net/ As far as I know it is used by several other projects. I was digging in this area at the weekend. It looks like initiailzation works like documented it should be. I get more the impression, that the dri client components send a request to the X server it does not understand. I guess we must ask the dri folks after making sure that there is not one of these components components outdated ... Greetings Mathias -- Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
On June 17, 2005 01:17 am, Mathias Frhlich wrote: On Donnerstag 16 Juni 2005 21:12, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: I have short circuted that with an unconditional false return in line 461 in RenderTexture.cpp. The crash happens in the first call to glXCreateGLXPbufferSGIX a few lines later. Is the error fixable? I just started the debugger to see where it happens. Dont' know so far. Are we sure that the pbuffer extension initialization/usage is entierly correct? Greetings Mathias I am also seeing these errors when I am running FlightGear under 16 bits color: RenderTexture Error: Couldn't find a suitable pixel format. WARNING: ssgLoadAC: Failed to open '/usr/local/FlightGear/share/FlightGear/Aircraft/c172r/Models/c172-dpm.ac' for reading This is with the latest version of the CVS. Could the problems be related? Ampere ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Mathias Frhlich wrote: On Donnerstag 16 Juni 2005 21:12, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: I have short circuted that with an unconditional false return in line 461 in RenderTexture.cpp. The crash happens in the first call to glXCreateGLXPbufferSGIX a few lines later. Is the error fixable? I just started the debugger to see where it happens. Dont' know so far. Are we sure that the pbuffer extension initialization/usage is entierly correct? It should be, The RenderTexture code is adapted from the RenderTexture class written by Mark Harris: http://www.markmark.net/misc/rendertexture.html http://gpgpu.sourceforge.net/ As far as I know it is used by several other projects. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Mathias Frhlich wrote: On Donnerstag 16 Juni 2005 09:58, Erik Hofman wrote: Again, I don't believe this part of the code is actually implemented for FlightGear and the new code has some early implementation for doings the same. It really requires much more work to make the old code plib aware, improve plib to support impostors and additionally to add the airflow code into the picture (I haven't even talked about making it METAR aware). Unless one of you starts to implement it now, it will probably be removed. Ok. In this case sory for the noise. No problem, there is nothing like a good discussion :-) Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: I am also seeing these errors when I am running FlightGear under 16 bits color: RenderTexture Error: Couldn't find a suitable pixel format. WARNING: ssgLoadAC: Failed to open '/usr/local/FlightGear/share/FlightGear/Aircraft/c172r/Models/c172-dpm.ac' for reading This is with the latest version of the CVS. Could the problems be related? No, the first problem tries to tell it can't find a proper pbuffer object using the specified settings (which also might mean it is running out of video ram). Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Erik Hofman wrote Ok. In this case sory for the noise. No problem, there is nothing like a good discussion :-) Erik And this was nothing like a good discussion :-). No, actually, I think we all developed our knowledge of this subject. V. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Erik Hofman wrote: http://gpgpu.sourceforge.net/ Well, now that I have an NVidia chip in the Octane - still I don't believe FlightGear can use it for such purpose, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Martin Spott wrote: Erik Hofman wrote: http://gpgpu.sourceforge.net/ Well, now that I have an NVidia chip in the Octane - still I don't believe FlightGear can use it for such purpose, If you can see the 3d clouds you already are using it ... Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
On June 16, 2005 01:18 am, Mathias Frhlich wrote: Look into that. I believed that this was integrated somehow. That looks phantastic and does things like that. Watch the video on the bottom of that page. Greetings Mathias I have just finished watching the video. Yes, the clouds do interact with the airflow. I see the potential for it to be used not only for eye candy, but to simulate realistic weather effects. In my opinion, the code for the old 3D clouds should definately be kept in the CVS. Ampere ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: On June 16, 2005 01:18 am, Mathias Frhlich wrote: Look into that. I believed that this was integrated somehow. That looks phantastic and does things like that. Watch the video on the bottom of that page. Greetings Mathias I have just finished watching the video. Yes, the clouds do interact with the airflow. I see the potential for it to be used not only for eye candy, but to simulate realistic weather effects. In my opinion, the code for the old 3D clouds should definately be kept in the CVS. Again, I don't believe this part of the code is actually implemented for FlightGear and the new code has some early implementation for doings the same. It really requires much more work to make the old code plib aware, improve plib to support impostors and additionally to add the airflow code into the picture (I haven't even talked about making it METAR aware). Unless one of you starts to implement it now, it will probably be removed. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Mathias Frhlich wrote On Mittwoch 15 Juni 2005 11:00, Vivian Meazza wrote: When browsing Mark Harris' web page I got the impression that he simulates the airflow. This one? http://www.markmark.net/clouds/ I can't find any reference in the site or the papers there to simulating airflow. It just renders clouds. http://www.markmark.net/cloudsim/index.html Look into that. I believed that this was integrated somehow. That looks phantastic and does things like that. Watch the video on the bottom of that page. Wonderful - just what we need! However, where's the code? I don't think it's what we have. The OpenGL stuff for download from Mark's site just renders cloud. This is Simulation of Cloud Dynamics on Graphics Hardware From his paper: 5. Hardware Implementation As mentioned before, we perform all of the numerical computation for our cloud simulator in the programmable, floating point fragment unit of a graphics processor. Hmmm. Have I got this one wrong? Mark's code (OpenGL) renders up to 51 fixed shape clouds. His lighting and shading is good. I like the way the aircraft penetrates cloud from an outside view. Harald's clouds are nicer, more varied, but perhaps not quite as well lit and shaded. The cloud penetration from an outside view could be improved (and I'm sure will be). Mark's code does not seem to be under active development, while Harald's is. I therefore support the retirement of Mark's OpenGL code. Of course, if we can go the Simulation of Cloud Dynamics on Graphics Hardware route, then wow! All bets are off. Anyone know how to program graphics hardware so that any/all cards would work? V. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Vivian Meazza wrote: Mathias Frhlich wrote On Mittwoch 15 Juni 2005 11:00, Vivian Meazza wrote: When browsing Mark Harris' web page I got the impression that he simulates the airflow. This one? http://www.markmark.net/clouds/ I can't find any reference in the site or the papers there to simulating airflow. It just renders clouds. http://www.markmark.net/cloudsim/index.html Look into that. I believed that this was integrated somehow. That looks phantastic and does things like that. Watch the video on the bottom of that page. Wonderful - just what we need! However, where's the code? I don't think it's what we have. The OpenGL stuff for download from Mark's site just renders cloud. This is Simulation of Cloud Dynamics on Graphics Hardware From his paper: 5. Hardware Implementation As mentioned before, we perform all of the numerical computation for our cloud simulator in the programmable, floating point fragment unit of a graphics processor. Hmmm. Have I got this one wrong? Mark's code (OpenGL) renders up to 51 fixed shape clouds. His lighting and shading is good. I like the way the aircraft penetrates cloud from an outside view. Harald's clouds are nicer, more varied, but perhaps not quite as well lit and shaded. The cloud penetration from an outside view could be improved (and I'm sure will be). Mark's code does not seem to be under active development, while Harald's is. I therefore support the retirement of Mark's OpenGL code. Of course, if we can go the Simulation of Cloud Dynamics on Graphics Hardware route, then wow! All bets are off. Anyone know how to program graphics hardware so that any/all cards would work? V. On Harris pages there is two different things. One is about cloud rendering - physical aspect of scattering of light and technical implementation using dynamic billboards, etc. The other is about simulating the formation of clouds (and simulating fluids in general). The 'Skywork' code available on his site and integrated in FG only handle the rendering, the simulation of formation of clouds is usually non real time anyway. It could be done realltime of course, it all depends of the degree of realism one wants. Other papers show how to do that with non physical rules and still have nice results. See Dobashi and Nishita paper : http://nis-lab.is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~nis/abs_sig.html#sig00 About the current lighting of clouds : I admit that it is very simplistic but it has at least the advantage of being light for the cpu and the graphic card. Now it is possible to integrate the Harris lighting method with the existing code and have something perhaps not so far from his rendering. This is easy to do, I could make a prototype (err when I have a free moment). Harald. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
On June 16, 2005 01:24 am, Mathias Frhlich wrote: I tried with 24. On a recent Mesa CVS r200 driver I get the same error message. With the r200 driver from my distro it just crashes. I have short circuted that with an unconditional false return in line 461 in RenderTexture.cpp. The crash happens in the first call to glXCreateGLXPbufferSGIX a few lines later. Greetings Mathias Is the error fixable? Ampere ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:35:23 +0100, Vivian wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Mathias Frhlich wrote On Mittwoch 15 Juni 2005 11:00, Vivian Meazza wrote: When browsing Mark Harris' web page I got the impression that he simulates the airflow. This one? http://www.markmark.net/clouds/ I can't find any reference in the site or the papers there to simulating airflow. It just renders clouds. http://www.markmark.net/cloudsim/index.html Look into that. I believed that this was integrated somehow. That looks phantastic and does things like that. Watch the video on the bottom of that page. Wonderful - just what we need! However, where's the code? I don't think it's what we have. The OpenGL stuff for download from Mark's site just renders cloud. This is Simulation of Cloud Dynamics on Graphics Hardware From his paper: 5. Hardware Implementation As mentioned before, we perform all of the numerical computation for our cloud simulator in the programmable, floating point fragment unit of a graphics processor. Hmmm. Have I got this one wrong? Mark's code (OpenGL) renders up to 51 fixed shape clouds. His lighting and shading is good. I like the way the aircraft penetrates cloud from an outside view. Harald's clouds are nicer, more varied, but perhaps not quite as well lit and shaded. The cloud penetration from an outside view could be improved (and I'm sure will be). Mark's code does not seem to be under active development, while Harald's is. I therefore support the retirement of Mark's OpenGL code. Of course, if we can go the Simulation of Cloud Dynamics on Graphics Hardware route, then wow! All bets are off. Anyone know how to program graphics hardware so that any/all cards would work? ..I proposed using the graphics hardware a while back, in January: Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Is this usefull for flightgear/jsbsim? Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Is this usefull for flightgear/jsbsim? Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ..Andy cautioned in Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Harald JOHNSEN Vivian Meazza wrote: Mathias Frhlich wrote On Mittwoch 15 Juni 2005 11:00, Vivian Meazza wrote: When browsing Mark Harris' web page I got the impression that he simulates the airflow. This one? http://www.markmark.net/clouds/ I can't find any reference in the site or the papers there to simulating airflow. It just renders clouds. http://www.markmark.net/cloudsim/index.html Look into that. I believed that this was integrated somehow. That looks phantastic and does things like that. Watch the video on the bottom of that page. Wonderful - just what we need! However, where's the code? I don't think it's what we have. The OpenGL stuff for download from Mark's site just renders cloud. This is Simulation of Cloud Dynamics on Graphics Hardware From his paper: 5. Hardware Implementation As mentioned before, we perform all of the numerical computation for our cloud simulator in the programmable, floating point fragment unit of a graphics processor. Hmmm. Have I got this one wrong? Mark's code (OpenGL) renders up to 51 fixed shape clouds. His lighting and shading is good. I like the way the aircraft penetrates cloud from an outside view. Harald's clouds are nicer, more varied, but perhaps not quite as well lit and shaded. The cloud penetration from an outside view could be improved (and I'm sure will be). Mark's code does not seem to be under active development, while Harald's is. I therefore support the retirement of Mark's OpenGL code. Of course, if we can go the Simulation of Cloud Dynamics on Graphics Hardware route, then wow! All bets are off. Anyone know how to program graphics hardware so that any/all cards would work? V. On Harris pages there is two different things. One is about cloud rendering - physical aspect of scattering of light and technical implementation using dynamic billboards, etc. The other is about simulating the formation of clouds (and simulating fluids in general). The 'Skywork' code available on his site and integrated in FG only handle the rendering, the simulation of formation of clouds is usually non real time anyway. It could be done realltime of course, it all depends of the degree of realism one wants. Other papers show how to do that with non physical rules and still have nice results. See Dobashi and Nishita paper : http://nis-lab.is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~nis/abs_sig.html#sig00 About the current lighting of clouds : I admit that it is very simplistic but it has at least the advantage of being light for the cpu and the graphic card. Now it is possible to integrate the Harris lighting method with the existing code and have something perhaps not so far from his rendering. This is easy to do, I could make a prototype (err when I have a free moment). That would be very nice indeed; then we would have the best of both worlds. The cloud penetration method is probably the biggest difference visually. V. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
On Donnerstag 16 Juni 2005 21:12, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: I have short circuted that with an unconditional false return in line 461 in RenderTexture.cpp. The crash happens in the first call to glXCreateGLXPbufferSGIX a few lines later. Is the error fixable? I just started the debugger to see where it happens. Dont' know so far. Are we sure that the pbuffer extension initialization/usage is entierly correct? Greetings Mathias -- Mathias Frhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
On Donnerstag 16 Juni 2005 09:58, Erik Hofman wrote: Again, I don't believe this part of the code is actually implemented for FlightGear and the new code has some early implementation for doings the same. It really requires much more work to make the old code plib aware, improve plib to support impostors and additionally to add the airflow code into the picture (I haven't even talked about making it METAR aware). Unless one of you starts to implement it now, it will probably be removed. Ok. In this case sory for the noise. Greetings Mathias -- Mathias Frhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
On Donnerstag 16 Juni 2005 20:13, Harald JOHNSEN wrote: On Harris pages there is two different things. One is about cloud rendering - physical aspect of scattering of light and technical implementation using dynamic billboards, etc. The other is about simulating the formation of clouds (and simulating fluids in general). The 'Skywork' code available on his site and integrated in FG only handle the rendering, the simulation of formation of clouds is usually non real time anyway. It could be done realltime of course, it all depends of the degree of realism one wants. Other papers show how to do that with non physical rules and still have nice results. See Dobashi and Nishita paper : http://nis-lab.is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~nis/abs_sig.html#sig00 About the current lighting of clouds : I admit that it is very simplistic but it has at least the advantage of being light for the cpu and the graphic card. Now it is possible to integrate the Harris lighting method with the existing code and have something perhaps not so far from his rendering. This is easy to do, I could make a prototype (err when I have a free moment). That would be great!!! Greetings Mathias -- Mathias Frhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
On Dienstag 14 Juni 2005 10:16, Erik Hofman wrote: Mathias Fröhlich wrote: So the last thing I remembered was that flying through clouds was much better with the old code. The new clouds seem to be afraid from an aircraft. They just move out of the flight path. As a result you almost never fly through clouds. Is this still the case? Nope. Ok. ... I still cannot test. Even with different/newer/older r200 modules. My radeon on the notebook starts with enabled texture rendering, but I cannot see any cloud. I think I first need to dig in the archives how to enable correctly ... If I understood right the Harris code really simulates the air. That means one could extract realistic upwinds and downwinds from that simulation. This has been added by David Culp, we just put a thundercloud and a ThunderStorm AIModel at the same location. I was not talking about one single change to the winds in such a clould. When browsing Mark Harris' web page I got the impression that he simulates the airflow. He seems to have upwinds at mountain slopes. When you look into that video he has on this page, you can even inject wind speed with the mouse into the scenery. This shows up in the clouds movement. ... one could then propably integrate the down wash of an aircraft into the clouds. When looking into that video, I get the impression that one could probably get very realistic contrails for free. From that, I believe that Harris' code is only horribly integrated. I did never look into the code to see if this would be easy to do. It's a pity, but since I don't have the time to look into that I cannot vote for keeping that ... I think It's safe to say the new clouds code supersedes the old one. Not convinced when looking at the Harris' page, but also not willing to proove the oposite. Ok, remove ... May be you could tag the cvs before you remove. Greetings Mathias -- Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Mathias Fröhlich wrote: On Dienstag 14 Juni 2005 10:16, Erik Hofman wrote: Mathias Fröhlich wrote: So the last thing I remembered was that flying through clouds was much better with the old code. The new clouds seem to be afraid from an aircraft. They just move out of the flight path. As a result you almost never fly through clouds. Is this still the case? Nope. Ok. ... I still cannot test. Even with different/newer/older r200 modules. My radeon on the notebook starts with enabled texture rendering, but I cannot see any cloud. I think I first need to dig in the archives how to enable correctly ... There where a few reports that one would need at least 24/32 bit colors to get it working (although it used to work with 16 bits in previous versions). When browsing Mark Harris' web page I got the impression that he simulates the airflow. He seems to have upwinds at mountain slopes. When you look into that video he has on this page, you can even inject wind speed with the mouse into the scenery. This shows up in the clouds movement. ... one could then propably integrate the down wash of an aircraft into the clouds. When looking into that video, I get the impression that one could probably get very realistic contrails for free. From that, I believe that Harris' code is only horribly integrated. I did never look into the code to see if this would be easy to do. I don't think that part of the code was ever added to FlightGear, just the cloud rendering. The new code does have some early implementation for clouds changing over time. Since this one is better integrated it might be better to modify the new code to support it. May be you could tag the cvs before you remove. Since there is no rush I'll leave it in for a few more days. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Mathias Fröhlich wrote: I think I first need to dig in the archives how to enable correctly ... Oh, one more thing, the code is disabled by default now. Use the rendering dialog to enable it again. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Mathias Fröhlich wrote On Dienstag 14 Juni 2005 10:16, Erik Hofman wrote: When browsing Mark Harris' web page I got the impression that he simulates the airflow. This one? http://www.markmark.net/clouds/ I can't find any reference in the site or the papers there to simulating airflow. It just renders clouds. He seems to have upwinds at mountain slopes. When you look into that video he has on this page, you can even inject wind speed with the mouse into the scenery. This shows up in the clouds movement. I can't do that - do I have the wrong website? ... one could then propably integrate the down wash of an aircraft into the clouds. When looking into that video, I get the impression that one could probably get very realistic contrails for free. From that, I believe that Harris' code is only horribly integrated. I did never look into the code to see if this would be easy to do. The particle method is good, and quick. We still need better smoke/contrails - the hack using ballistic objects is not very good (my code - I can criticize it). The problem is the way transparency is handled by plib, and I can't see a way round it. Still, no one else complains ... V. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Erik Hofman wrote: There where a few reports that one would need at least 24/32 bit colors to get it working (although it used to work with 16 bits in previous versions). Doesn't work here in 16 bits ... I get some sort of invalid render context error message. FlightGear runs, but no 3d clouds show up. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
On June 15, 2005 04:05 am, Erik Hofman wrote: There where a few reports that one would need at least 24/32 bit colors to get it working (although it used to work with 16 bits in previous versions). It used to work with 16 bits. After I upgraded from the latest CVS version, the 3D clouds don't work in 16 bits anymore. When I switched to 24/32 bits, I get this error messages: X Error of failed request: GLXUnsupportedPrivateRequest Major opcode of failed request: 143 (GLX) Minor opcode of failed request: 16 (X_GLXVendorPrivate) Serial number of failed request: 41 Current serial number in output stream: 42 =( Ampere ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Hi, On Donnerstag 16 Juni 2005 03:20, Ampere K. Hardraade wrote: On June 15, 2005 04:05 am, Erik Hofman wrote: There where a few reports that one would need at least 24/32 bit colors to get it working (although it used to work with 16 bits in previous versions). It used to work with 16 bits. After I upgraded from the latest CVS version, the 3D clouds don't work in 16 bits anymore. When I switched to 24/32 bits, I get this error messages: X Error of failed request: GLXUnsupportedPrivateRequest Major opcode of failed request: 143 (GLX) Minor opcode of failed request: 16 (X_GLXVendorPrivate) Serial number of failed request: 41 Current serial number in output stream: 42 I tried with 24. On a recent Mesa CVS r200 driver I get the same error message. With the r200 driver from my distro it just crashes. I have short circuted that with an unconditional false return in line 461 in RenderTexture.cpp. The crash happens in the first call to glXCreateGLXPbufferSGIX a few lines later. Greetings Mathias -- Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Hi, On Mittwoch 15 Juni 2005 11:00, Vivian Meazza wrote: When browsing Mark Harris' web page I got the impression that he simulates the airflow. This one? http://www.markmark.net/clouds/ I can't find any reference in the site or the papers there to simulating airflow. It just renders clouds. http://www.markmark.net/cloudsim/index.html Look into that. I believed that this was integrated somehow. That looks phantastic and does things like that. Watch the video on the bottom of that page. Greetings Mathias -- Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
On Montag 13 Juni 2005 11:03, Melchior FRANZ wrote: Probably a good idea. The old code is broken, unmaintained, and uses nasty binary cloud definition files, while the new code yields much better results (except when flying through clouds). The old code may be more advanced in some respect (and slower :-), but it'll remain in the Attic/ anyway, so if someone wants to pick it up again, fix it, and make it better than the new clouds, go ahead ... Hmm, while I am a bit late now. I have not used the new code for some weeks. That is because of a crash in the OpenGL driver when called from the 'render in texture' initialization. So I cannot really tell how it looks like. Since nobody other complained I think it is a problem in this driver. So the last thing I remembered was that flying through clouds was much better with the old code. The new clouds seem to be afraid from an aircraft. They just move out of the flight path. As a result you almost never fly through clouds. Is this still the case? And if so, could the new cloud code be changed to behave like the old one in this case? If I understood right the Harris code really simulates the air. That means one could extract realistic upwinds and downwinds from that simulation. It's a pity, but since I don't have the time to look into that I cannot vote for keeping that ... Greetings Mathias -- Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Mathias Fröhlich wrote: So the last thing I remembered was that flying through clouds was much better with the old code. The new clouds seem to be afraid from an aircraft. They just move out of the flight path. As a result you almost never fly through clouds. Is this still the case? Nope. If I understood right the Harris code really simulates the air. That means one could extract realistic upwinds and downwinds from that simulation. This has been added by David Culp, we just put a thundercloud and a ThunderStorm AIModel at the same location. It's a pity, but since I don't have the time to look into that I cannot vote for keeping that ... I think It's safe to say the new clouds code supersedes the old one. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Melchior FRANZ wrote: Both the old 2D clouds (note the TWO) and the new 3D clouds consider METAR. The old 3D clouds that Erik is talking about do AFAIK not. They are ugly and broken, and aren't representative for anything. It sounds as if you are mixing up 2D and 3D. As far as I know the old 3d clouds do not use metar for anything. In fact it just shows the same cloudfield over and over again. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Le lundi 13 juin 2005 12:58 +0200, Melchior FRANZ a crit : * Gerard Robin -- Monday 13 June 2005 12:21: Le lundi 13 juin 2005 10:29 +0200, Erik Hofman a crit : How would you all feel about making the old Haris' 3d clouds code obsolete by now? We must keep it, with Metar it is the most Representative of the real weather the new 3D clouds is beautiful only. Both the old 2D clouds (note the TWO) and the new 3D clouds consider METAR. The old 3D clouds that Erik is talking about do AFAIK not. They are ugly and broken, and aren't representative for anything. It sounds as if you are mixing up 2D and 3D. m. Oh sorry if you mean _bumped_ clouds it can be removed. We must be able to choose between normal clouds and new 3D clouds, because, with Metar, when i look at the windows (you probably can do it :-) ), i worry, i see a sky which is nearly the same than that i have on my screen, and an other sky with new 3D clouds. I do not contest that new 3D Clouds takes in account Metar, up to now, it is not able to give the real picture. (that could be probably improved). You could understand that i must, now, be careful when i give my opinion, since the _JSB_crash_handling_affair_ which makes for me crash down many hours of work.( to keep it i must run with a permanent patched fg). But i get off the main subject... OK!! -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Le lundi 13 juin 2005 13:05 +0200, Erik Hofman a crit : Melchior FRANZ wrote: Both the old 2D clouds (note the TWO) and the new 3D clouds consider METAR. The old 3D clouds that Erik is talking about do AFAIK not. They are ugly and broken, and aren't representative for anything. It sounds as if you are mixing up 2D and 3D. As far as I know the old 3d clouds do not use metar for anything. In fact it just shows the same cloudfield over and over again. Erik OK i understand what you mean, i haver used it. -- Gerard ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: old 3d clouds code
Gerard Robin wrote: Oh sorry if you mean _bumped_ clouds it can be removed. Eh, no. It's yet another one... Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
