Jim Wilson wrote:
Yes, exactly. That's what I meant when saying that we wouldn't have to
rewrite the whole thing. I doing just that once before and the result was
the model came out flat shaded. We need the part that traverses the tree and
calculates the normals which is buried in the
Frederic Bouvier [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I guess the close factor is a percentage of the dimensions of the whole
model.
I had those problems with the knobs of the A320 but the instruments modelled
independently are fine.
Hmmm... Are you modeling in blender or ac3d? The reason why I ask is
Matevz Jekovec wrote:
What I'm hoping is there will be a bunch of good quality low polygons
aircraft available also (for people like myself using less than
optimal hardware).
My J-22 has only 2500 vertices and looks nice besides ;).
... and still works pretty well on my system.
Somehow the
On Thursday 02 October 2003 03:52, Jim Wilson wrote:
BTW there is a plib bug showing up on the bottom. That is one example
of how
the ac3d loader really is screwing up the shading. My guess is the
optimization is to blame. Checking it out in wire frame mode (in
flightgear)
might reveal
Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thursday 02 October 2003 03:52, Jim Wilson wrote:
BTW there is a plib bug showing up on the bottom. That is one example
of how
the ac3d loader really is screwing up the shading. My guess is the
optimization is to blame. Checking it out in wire
Jim Wilson wrote:
That works sometimes. The problem is that the optimization tries to merge
polys together that it thinks it can. The exact criteria I haven't gotten
into yet. Probably looking harder at the code would reveil the exact process.
The reason I haven't looked hard is that I am
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Jim Wilson wrote:
That works sometimes. The problem is that the optimization tries to merge
polys together that it thinks it can. The exact criteria I haven't gotten
into yet. Probably looking harder at the code would reveil the exact process.
The
On Thursday 02 October 2003 21:21, Jim Wilson wrote:
Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thursday 02 October 2003 03:52, Jim Wilson wrote:
BTW there is a plib bug showing up on the bottom. That is one
example
of how
the ac3d loader really is screwing up the shading. My guess is
Lee Elliott wrote:
Ta for the explanation - it makes some sort of sense now and is
understandable in the context of 'loose' vertices. I'd much rather it
didn't try any optimisations with the geometry though - it's better fixed
by fixing it in the model, imo.
As this problem is mostly
Hi Lee
Great aircraft.You sure know how to make us feel inadequate.LOL
Would just like to ask a couple of questions if I may
What program did you use for the model.
The texture looks like it is made in layers I have never seen this
before.What did you use to make it.
And now I am going to have
Innis Cunningham wrote:
Hi Lee
Great aircraft.You sure know how to make us feel inadequate.LOL
Just to get ahead of every one, the 10,000+ vertices are just too much
for my poor O2. One every 20 seconds is slightly too slow for good
simulation purposes.
Try to get somewhere near 1,000 and you
On Wednesday 01 October 2003 11:42, Innis Cunningham wrote:
Hi Lee
Great aircraft.You sure know how to make us feel inadequate.LOL
Would just like to ask a couple of questions if I may
What program did you use for the model.
The texture looks like it is made in layers I have never seen
On Wednesday 01 October 2003 13:39, Erik Hofman wrote:
Innis Cunningham wrote:
Hi Lee
Great aircraft.You sure know how to make us feel inadequate.LOL
Just to get ahead of every one, the 10,000+ vertices are just too much
for my poor O2. One every 20 seconds is slightly too slow for good
Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Wednesday 01 October 2003 13:39, Erik Hofman wrote:
Innis Cunningham wrote:
Hi Lee
Great aircraft.You sure know how to make us feel inadequate.LOL
Just to get ahead of every one, the 10,000+ vertices are just too much
for my poor O2. One
Lee Elliott wrote:
On Wednesday 01 October 2003 13:39, Erik Hofman wrote:
Innis Cunningham wrote:
Hi Lee
Great aircraft.You sure know how to make us feel inadequate.LOL
Just to get ahead of every one, the 10,000+ vertices are just too much
for my poor O2. One every 20 seconds is slightly too
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Yeah - none of my models could be regarded as low-poly. Then again, the
shapes of the models I tend to do are quite complex and not a simple tube
like the majority of airliners. There's quite an overhead in doing the
detail stuff like the
Jim Wilson wrote:
Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Wednesday 01 October 2003 13:39, Erik Hofman wrote:
Innis Cunningham wrote:
Hi Lee
Great aircraft.You sure know how to make us feel inadequate.LOL
Just to get ahead of every one, the 10,000+ vertices are just too much
for my poor O2.
Could anyone provide a screen dump image of this aircraft flying in
FlightGear?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
If it's not too much effort it's got to be worth looking into. Feel free
to try reducing some of mine if you wish.
I've had a little play with the reduce function in AC3D but to be honest,
it's in the opposite direction to what I want to do.
Sure,
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
Did anyone change anything with property names recently? My flight
recorder is also broke now. :-(
Not that I'm aware of.
Erik
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lee Elliott has just contributed an AN225 to the FlightGear project
and I have just committed it to CVS. This aircraft is the biggest one
built for FlightGear so far and it flies and looks really nice.
Regards,
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project
Twin
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Lee Elliott has just contributed an AN225 to the FlightGear project
and I have just committed it to CVS. This aircraft is the biggest one
built for FlightGear so far and it flies and looks really nice.
And the 747-400 quietly steps aside :-)
BTW the
Jim Wilson writes:
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Lee Elliott has just contributed an AN225 to the FlightGear project
and I have just committed it to CVS. This aircraft is the biggest one
built for FlightGear so far and it flies and looks really nice.
And the 747-400
Lee Elliott has just contributed an AN225 to the FlightGear project
and I have just committed it to CVS.
Does the an225 need an an225-set.xml wrapper?
Scanning command line for: --aircraft=
aircraft = an225
Cannot find specified aircraft: an225
Scanning command line for: --aircraft=
David Culp writes:
Lee Elliott has just contributed an AN225 to the FlightGear project
and I have just committed it to CVS.
Does the an225 need an an225-set.xml wrapper?
Scanning command line for: --aircraft=
aircraft = an225
Cannot find specified aircraft: an225
Oh, or more
David Culp wrote:
Lee Elliott has just contributed an AN225 to the FlightGear project
and I have just committed it to CVS.
Does the an225 need an an225-set.xml wrapper?
Scanning command line for: --aircraft=
aircraft = an225
Cannot find specified aircraft: an225
Try with
It should be there in the an225 directory (requires recent
simgear/flightgear CVS.) If you have that, make sure you did a cvs
update -d (to fetch newly created directories, which aren't fetched by
default.)
It isn't there as of ten minutes ago, so I made one. By the way, that's a
great
One of these flew into work last year I think,
It's quite spectacular to watch land, it's enormous, blots the horizon
out.
On Mon, 2003-09-29 at 16:24, Jim Wilson wrote:
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Lee Elliott has just contributed an AN225 to the FlightGear project
and I have
David Culp writes:
It should be there in the an225 directory (requires recent
simgear/flightgear CVS.) If you have that, make sure you did a cvs
update -d (to fetch newly created directories, which aren't fetched by
default.)
It isn't there as of ten minutes ago, so I made one. By the
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 12:02:26 -0500
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did anyone change anything with property names recently? My flight
recorder is also broke now. :-(
What's the date on JSBSim.cxx? There were some changes that were made
to that file for engines, I think. If that was
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 11:42:18 -0500
David Culp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Failed to untie property /consumables/fuel/tank[0]/level-gal_us
Failed to untie property /consumables/fuel/tank[1]/level-gal_us
Failed to untie property /engines/engine[0]/fuel-flow-gph
Failed to untie property
On Monday 29 September 2003 16:24, Jim Wilson wrote:
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Lee Elliott has just contributed an AN225 to the FlightGear project
and I have just committed it to CVS. This aircraft is the biggest one
built for FlightGear so far and it flies and looks really
On Monday 29 September 2003 16:24, Jim Wilson wrote:
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Lee Elliott has just contributed an AN225 to the FlightGear project
and I have just committed it to CVS. This aircraft is the biggest one
built for FlightGear so far and it flies and looks really
33 matches
Mail list logo
