Jim Wilson wrote:
Just a thought: Wouldn't we improve the rendering efficiency by building
downtown urban areas as a scene...e.g. single model with one ac file for all
the buildings?
A few things I can think of:
1) Less effort positioning buildings (easier to move them around if need be).
Just
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
1) Less effort positioning buildings (easier to move them around if need be).
Just place the origin at some landmark in the scene and place the whole thing
in one shot.
I really think we should switch over to .ssg files for scenery objects.
The
Jim Wilson wrote:
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
1) Less effort positioning buildings (easier to move them around if need be).
Just place the origin at some landmark in the scene and place the whole thing
in one shot.
I really think we should switch over to .ssg files for scenery objects.
Jim Wilson wrote:
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
1) Less effort positioning buildings (easier to move them around if
need be).
Just place the origin at some landmark in the scene and place the
whole thing
in one shot.
We will have problems with non-flat terrains. Actually, I use
As a blender user I'd like to see blender supporting some of these
formats natively... I'm getting the urge to do something about that, at
the moment it falls about 20th on my TODO list. Above that is closer
integration of blender and the gimp for UV textures through the python
interface.
On
Jim Wilson writes:
1) Less effort positioning buildings (easier to move them around if
need be). Just place the origin at some landmark in the scene and
place the whole thing in one shot.
Static scenery should be positioned only once, when the tile is
loaded, so there's no on-going
Frederic Bouvier writes:
I vote for to remove this sharp edge smoothing artefact.
All of our airplanes will start looking a lot worse.
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/
___
Flightgear-devel
Erik Hofman writes:
I tested this one a bit today and even a LOD of 1 meters will give
good results on the SFO skyscrapers for normal (non clear sky
conditions), it has just one drawback: after conversion FlightGear
doesn't seem to find the textures anymore:
Jim Wilson writes:
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
1) Less effort positioning buildings (easier to move them around if need be).
Just place the origin at some landmark in the scene and place the whole thing
in one shot.
I really think we should switch over to .ssg files for
David Megginson writes:
Jim Wilson writes:
Is this true that the textures get reloaded, and is there some way to share
textures between objects and not just save disk space?
Any comment, plib types?
SSG models should already be sharing textures based on
'Texture Name' see
Erik Hofman wrote:
I tested this one a bit today and even a LOD of 1 meters will give
good results on the SFO skyscrapers for normal (non clear sky
conditions), it has just one drawback: after conversion FlightGear
doesn't seem to find the textures anymore:
That's odd. After tweaking the
On Sunday 13 July 2003 10:39, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
I vote for to remove this sharp edge smoothing artefact.
-Fred
That would save me a lot of time:)
LeeE
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sunday 13 July 2003 11:14, Norman Vine wrote:
Jim Wilson writes:
we could keep the .ac .3ds .whatever files as they are in the base package
and require that you run a 'scenery' compiler before you actually run FGFS
after a scenery update.
While it's great that we _can_ use .3ds models,
On Sunday 13 July 2003 11:07, David Megginson wrote:
Frederic Bouvier writes:
I vote for to remove this sharp edge smoothing artefact.
All of our airplanes will start looking a lot worse.
All the best,
David
--
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/
Lee Elliott writes:
Is there any way to set a constriant on it? It's fine when it's
smoothing angles 90deg 270 but it would be better if it didn't
try to do sharper angles. This seems to be the cause of the
artifacts often seen on models, for example at the wing traiing
edges.
It's
I wonder if it's possible to write a plib loader for blender files?
On Sun, 2003-07-13 at 16:00, David Megginson wrote:
Lee Elliott writes:
Is there any way to set a constriant on it? It's fine when it's
smoothing angles 90deg 270 but it would be better if it didn't
try to do
Christopher S Horler writes:
I wonder if it's possible to write a plib loader for blender files?
Very much so. An easier solution, though, would be to fix plib's
VRML1 loader so that it works with *.wrl files exported by Blender.
Nobody likes VRML1, but everybody can import and export it, and
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Lee Elliott writes:
Is there any way to set a constriant on it? It's fine when it's
smoothing angles 90deg 270 but it would be better if it didn't
try to do sharper angles. This seems to be the cause of the
artifacts often seen on models,
18 matches
Mail list logo
