On Tuesday, 25 January 2005 12:11, you wrote:
> On Tuesday, 25 January 2005 10:33, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > Paul Surgeon wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 25 January 2005 02:29, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
> > > > After reading the glPointSize doc, I think the problem is in using
> > > > point sizes bigger than 1 a
On Tuesday, 25 January 2005 10:33, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> Paul Surgeon wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 25 January 2005 02:29, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
> > > After reading the glPointSize doc, I think the problem is in using
> > > point sizes bigger than 1 and point antialiasing at the same time
> > > I can't tes
Paul Surgeon wrote:
> On Tuesday, 25 January 2005 02:29, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
> > After reading the glPointSize doc, I think the problem is in using point
> > sizes bigger than 1 and point antialiasing at the same time
> > I can't test it now, can someone do it? just disable GL_POINT_SMOOTH and
> >
On Tuesday, 25 January 2005 02:29, Tiago Gusmão wrote:
> After reading the glPointSize doc, I think the problem is in using point
> sizes bigger than 1 and point antialiasing at the same time
> I can't test it now, can someone do it? just disable GL_POINT_SMOOTH and
> see it there is an fps improve
On January 24, 2005 12:50 pm, Jim Wilson wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, is anyone getting this slowdown with ATI cards?
>
> Best,
>
> Jim
If you mean whether I get slow down on airport at night, the answer is yes.
In external view, I get about 6-7fps. At night, the framerates get halved.
Amp
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Dave Martin wrote:
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 13:37, Oliver C. wrote:
On Monday 24 January 2005 11:05, Erik Hofman wrote:
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Thanks for this explanation. Why does it only seem to work one way?
The
description 'enhanced lighti
Dave Martin wrote
> On Monday 24 Jan 2005 20:22, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > Erik wrote:
> > > Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > > > Erik Hofman
> > > > An alternative might be to use pentagonal vertex-fans and alpha
> > > > blending
> > > >
> > > > ^^^
> >
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 20:22, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> Erik wrote:
> > Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > > Erik Hofman
> > > An alternative might be to use pentagonal vertex-fans and alpha
> > > blending
> > >
> > > ^^^
> > > And in English that is ... ? :-)
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 20:15, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Monday 24 Jan 2005 19:39, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> > Something about runway lighting has changed recently. Either newer
> > nvidia drivers/cards have intentionally slowed down some things, or we
> > are doing something different. I don't recall
Erik wrote:
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > Erik Hofman
> > An alternative might be to use pentagonal vertex-fans and alpha blending
> >
> > ^^^
> > And in English that is ... ? :-) Is that some voodoo?
>
> Oh sorry, just a disc constructed from f
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 19:39, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> Something about runway lighting has changed recently. Either newer
> nvidia drivers/cards have intentionally slowed down some things, or we
> are doing something different. I don't recall a change on our end, but
> previously, I never saw any
Paul Surgeon wrote:
On Monday, 24 January 2005 20:32, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
The opengl interface itself (for a variety of good reasons) doesn't
provide you a way to directly tell if something is implimented in
hardware or software. Note that this isn't dropping your whole card
into software re
On Monday, 24 January 2005 20:32, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> The opengl interface itself (for a variety of good reasons) doesn't
> provide you a way to directly tell if something is implimented in
> hardware or software. Note that this isn't dropping your whole card
> into software rendering mode, i
Dave Martin wrote:
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 17:50, Jim Wilson wrote:
Erik Hofman said:
Dave Martin wrote:
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 14:01, Oliver C. wrote:
I assume that this feature is not supported by the hardware on the
consumer video cards.
So OpenGL falls back to software mode
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 17:50, Jim Wilson wrote:
> Erik Hofman said:
> > Dave Martin wrote:
> > > On Monday 24 Jan 2005 14:01, Oliver C. wrote:
> > >>I assume that this feature is not supported by the hardware on the
> > >> consumer video cards.
> > >>So OpenGL falls back to software mode.
> > >>That
Erik Hofman said:
> Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Monday 24 Jan 2005 14:01, Oliver C. wrote:
>
> >>I assume that this feature is not supported by the hardware on the consumer
> >>video cards.
> >>So OpenGL falls back to software mode.
> >>That's why we get 1-3 fps here.
> >>
> >
> > Well, thats inte
Dave Martin said:
>
> Well, I'm basically showing it the sharp-end of an AMD 3200XP with 1GB
> dual-channel and a 128Mb GeFarce FX5800 Ultra-Leaf-Blower and hoping for the
> best. ;-)
>
Hehe...yeah...everyone should have one of those. My FX5700 LE, decidedly
non-ultra consumer grade, goes i
Frederic Bouvier said:
> I implemented something in between :
> http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic-2.jpg
>
> The popup on this window is modal and stay as long as FG is running :
> http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic-3.jpg
>
Very nice!
Best,
Jim
__
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 15:44, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > It would be nice to find a 'solution' to better frame-rates at
> > illuminated airports tho because landing at EGLL at night can be near
> > impossible even on
> > 'good' hardware.
>
> This is a good question: just haw are people managing this
Dave Martin wrote:
> On Monday 24 Jan 2005 14:47, Erik Hofman wrote:
> > Dave Martin wrote:
> > > How about basic poly with a tiny texture set as 'spherical' (much as
> is
> > > done with the bo105 lights)
> > >
> > > Would that allow for better performance on consumer hardware or is
> that
> >
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 14:47, Erik Hofman wrote:
> Dave Martin wrote:
> > How about basic poly with a tiny texture set as 'spherical' (much as is
> > done with the bo105 lights)
> >
> > Would that allow for better performance on consumer hardware or is that
> > too simmilar to the method in use?
>
>
Dave Martin wrote:
How about basic poly with a tiny texture set as 'spherical' (much as is done
with the bo105 lights)
Would that allow for better performance on consumer hardware or is that too
simmilar to the method in use?
It might be a good idea to test both methods and see which one looks
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Erik Hofman
An alternative might be to use pentagonal vertex-fans and alpha blending
^^^
And in English that is ... ? :-) Is that some voodoo?
Oh sorry, just a disc constructed from five polygons.
Erik
___
Erik Hofman
> Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Monday 24 Jan 2005 14:01, Oliver C. wrote:
>
> >>I assume that this feature is not supported by the hardware on the
> consumer
> >>video cards.
> >>So OpenGL falls back to software mode.
> >>That's why we get 1-3 fps here.
> >>
> >
> > Well, thats interesti
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 14:24, Erik Hofman wrote:
> Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Monday 24 Jan 2005 14:01, Oliver C. wrote:
> >>I assume that this feature is not supported by the hardware on the
> >> consumer video cards.
> >>So OpenGL falls back to software mode.
> >>That's why we get 1-3 fps here.
> >
Dave Martin wrote:
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 14:01, Oliver C. wrote:
I assume that this feature is not supported by the hardware on the consumer
video cards.
So OpenGL falls back to software mode.
That's why we get 1-3 fps here.
Well, thats interesting; would that also explain why the normal 'point'
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 14:01, Oliver C. wrote:
> On Monday 24 January 2005 15:05, Dave Martin wrote:
> > I've also been confused by the monumental frame drop that even the simple
> > runway lighting can produce at airports such as EGLL.
> >
> > And I do have a fairly hefty system which has been know
Dave Martin wrote:
> On Monday 24 Jan 2005 13:37, Oliver C. wrote:
> > On Monday 24 January 2005 11:05, Erik Hofman wrote:
> > > Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > > > Thanks for this explanation. Why does it only seem to work one way?
> The
> > > > description 'enhanced lighting' is not particularly helpf
On Monday 24 January 2005 15:05, Dave Martin wrote:
>
> I've also been confused by the monumental frame drop that even the simple
> runway lighting can produce at airports such as EGLL.
>
> And I do have a fairly hefty system which has been known to run graphical
> behemoths like Doom3 at a fair li
On Monday 24 Jan 2005 13:37, Oliver C. wrote:
> On Monday 24 January 2005 11:05, Erik Hofman wrote:
> > Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > > Thanks for this explanation. Why does it only seem to work one way? The
> > > description 'enhanced lighting' is not particularly helpful.
> >
> > Oh, this is about enh
On Monday 24 January 2005 11:05, Erik Hofman wrote:
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > Thanks for this explanation. Why does it only seem to work one way? The
> > description 'enhanced lighting' is not particularly helpful.
>
> Oh, this is about enhanced (runway) lighting. That's a different story,
> I was
Erik Hofman wrote:
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
>
> > Right, so ignore all the foregoing - why does 'enhanced lighting
> (runway)'
> > change the colour of some 3d panels? Perhaps an artifact of the video
> card?
> > And why isn't it reversible?
>
> I'm not sure about the change in color of the 3d pan
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Right, so ignore all the foregoing - why does 'enhanced lighting (runway)'
change the colour of some 3d panels? Perhaps an artifact of the video card?
And why isn't it reversible?
I'm not sure about the change in color of the 3d panels, I've never
noticed that myself.
Regardi
Erik wrote:
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
>
> > Thanks for this explanation. Why does it only seem to work one way? The
> > description 'enhanced lighting' is not particularly helpful.
>
> Oh, this is about enhanced (runway) lighting. That's a different story,
> I was talking about specular highlight
Vivian Meazza wrote:
Thanks for this explanation. Why does it only seem to work one way? The
description 'enhanced lighting' is not particularly helpful.
Oh, this is about enhanced (runway) lighting. That's a different story,
I was talking about specular highlights which the original was talking
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Frederic Bouvier schrieb:
> Erik Hofman wrote :
>
>> Frederic Bouvier wrote:
>>
>>> This is in CVS now ( should show up in a few hours on SF ). In the
>>> meantime, a screenshot :
>>> http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic.jpg
>>
>>
>> If you're
Erik Hofman wrote:
> Vivian Meazza wrote:
>
> > On a Pentium 4 2.8 with a GeForce 5200 I get similar results. In
> addition,
> > checking this option during run-time changes the colours in the cockpit
> of
> > the some 3d models (I haven't tested them all). Unchecking it doesn't
> change
> > th
Vivian Meazza wrote:
On a Pentium 4 2.8 with a GeForce 5200 I get similar results. In addition,
checking this option during run-time changes the colours in the cockpit of
the some 3d models (I haven't tested them all). Unchecking it doesn't change
the colour back. Is this a viable option, or is the
Oliver wrote
> > >--(en/dis)able-enhanced-lighting
> >
> > This is in CVS now ( should show up in a few hours on SF ). In the
> > meantime, a screenshot :
> > http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic.jpg
> >
>
> Very nice.
> But i suggest to move the enhanced-lighting option into the advanc
> >--(en/dis)able-enhanced-lighting
>
> This is in CVS now ( should show up in a few hours on SF ). In the
> meantime, a screenshot :
> http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic.jpg
>
Very nice.
But i suggest to move the enhanced-lighting option into the advanced menu
or at least adding a noti
Vivian Meazza wrote :
Fred wrote:
Erik Hofman a écrit :
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
I implemented something in between :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic-2.jpg
The popup on this window is modal and stay as long as FG is running :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic-3
Fred wrote:
>
> Erik Hofman a écrit :
>
> > Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> >
> >> I implemented something in between :
> >> http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic-2.jpg
> >>
> >> The popup on this window is modal and stay as long as FG is running :
> >> http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-ba
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
This is in CVS now ( should show up in a few hours on SF ). In the
meantime, a screenshot :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic.jpg
Looks great Frederic, good work!
Curt.
--
Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt
HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanf
Erik Hofman a écrit :
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
I implemented something in between :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic-2.jpg
The popup on this window is modal and stay as long as FG is running :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic-3.jpg
Much better, great work!
If someone want to
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
I implemented something in between :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic-2.jpg
The popup on this window is modal and stay as long as FG is running :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic-3.jpg
Much better, great work!
Erik
Vivian Meazza wrote :
Fred wrote
Erik Hofman wrote :
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
This is in CVS now ( should show up in a few hours on SF ). In the
meantime, a screenshot :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic.jpg
If you're going this path (and it certainly does look goo
Fred wrote
> Erik Hofman wrote :
>
> > Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> >
> >> This is in CVS now ( should show up in a few hours on SF ). In the
> >> meantime, a screenshot :
> >> http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic.jpg
> >
> > If you're going this path (and it certainly does look good) then y
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Erik Hofman wrote :
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
This is in CVS now ( should show up in a few hours on SF ). In the
meantime, a screenshot :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic.jpg
If you're going this path (and it certainly does look good) then you
might want to consi
Erik Hofman wrote :
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
This is in CVS now ( should show up in a few hours on SF ). In the
meantime, a screenshot :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic.jpg
If you're going this path (and it certainly does look good) then you
might want to consider removing the command
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
This is in CVS now ( should show up in a few hours on SF ). In the
meantime, a screenshot :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgrun-basic.jpg
If you're going this path (and it certainly does look good) then you
might want to consider removing the command-line textbox altoge
Frederic Bouvier a écrit :
To bring fgrun to 1.0 quality grade, and after receiving suggestions from Curt,
I am now planning to add basic options to the wizard instead of keeping them
hidden behind the Advanced button. Maybe by reducing the size of the command
line textfield ( it could also be move
Jim Wilson wrote :
Norman Vine said:
but I don't see where setting the lat less then the ground elevation
has any bearing on this < this sounds more like a parsing error >
Norman
Well, yeah, fgrun still needs to be fixed.
The fix is in CVS
-Fred
_
On Friday, 21 January 2005 14:59, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> I forgot this one. It is not an improvement though, rather a fix ;-)
> The scenery scan is done every time and is very long although it is
> threaded and doesn't prevent you to launch flightgear. Curt suggested to
> show all the content of
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
I can explain the bug to you. If you specify a lon/lat that lies on the
*exact* border between two tiles (i.e. --lat=90 --lon=45) then at
startup the ground intersection code can fail. This means that the
scenery subsystem never returns a valid groud elevation.
Oh.
I d
Norman Vine said:
>
> but I don't see where setting the lat less then the ground elevation
> has any bearing on this < this sounds more like a parsing error >
>
> Norman
>
Well, yeah, fgrun still needs to be fixed. Just the same, fgfs should not
loop because of a command line entry if at al
Curtis L. Olson writes:
>
> Stewart Andreason wrote:
>
> > Jim Wilson wrote:
> >
> >> There are a couple bugs or at least they were there a week or so
> >> ago. One is
> >> just a mapping typo where latitude goes into both latitude and
> >> altitude. The
> >> other is under linux the fg-roo
Stewart Andreason wrote:
Jim Wilson wrote:
There are a couple bugs or at least they were there a week or so
ago. One is
just a mapping typo where latitude goes into both latitude and
altitude. The
other is under linux the fg-root and fg-scenery parameters don't get
saved and
passed on to fgf
Jim Wilson wrote:
There are a couple bugs or at least they were there a week or so ago. One is
just a mapping typo where latitude goes into both latitude and altitude. The
other is under linux the fg-root and fg-scenery parameters don't get saved and
passed on to fgfs (no prefs.set done) unless
Frederic Bouvier said:
> To bring fgrun to 1.0 quality grade, and after receiving suggestions from
> Curt,
> I am now planning to add basic options to the wizard instead of keeping them
> hidden behind the Advanced button. Maybe by reducing the size of the command
> line textfield ( it could also
Quoting Erik Hofman:
> Frederic Bouvier wrote:
>
> > I forgot this one. It is not an improvement though, rather a fix ;-)
> > The scenery scan is done every time and is very long although it is
> threaded and
> > doesn't prevent you to launch flightgear. Curt suggested to show all the
> content
>
Erik Hofman wrote:
Now that we use apt.dat (X-Plane format) it would be possible to walk
the list and get the lat/lon of the aircraft (first two parameters of
Make that airport
Erik
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightge
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
I forgot this one. It is not an improvement though, rather a fix ;-)
The scenery scan is done every time and is very long although it is threaded and
doesn't prevent you to launch flightgear. Curt suggested to show all the content
of apt.dat.gz and check the availability aft
On 21/01/2005 at 13:16 Frederic Bouvier wrote:
>To bring fgrun to 1.0 quality grade, and after receiving suggestions from
>Curt,
>I am now planning to add basic options to the wizard instead of keeping
>them
>hidden behind the Advanced button. Maybe by reducing the size of the
>command
>line tex
Quoting Martin Spott :
> Frederic Bouvier wrote:
>
> > Comments welcome
>
> Great ideas, just one little concern: What measures are applied to
> identify which airports should show up in the selection list ? Consider
> a user has installed most of the world scenery, is FGrun then going to
> parse
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> Comments welcome
Great ideas, just one little concern: What measures are applied to
identify which airports should show up in the selection list ? Consider
a user has installed most of the world scenery, is FGrun then going to
parse the whole scenery to see which airport
To bring fgrun to 1.0 quality grade, and after receiving suggestions from Curt,
I am now planning to add basic options to the wizard instead of keeping them
hidden behind the Advanced button. Maybe by reducing the size of the command
line textfield ( it could also be move to the Advanced section ).
66 matches
Mail list logo
