Mark wrote:
> As far as I see it, the manual alteration of the city textures should be
> kept as an option.
> By default the use of the regional textures makes more sence, since
> modifying every town would be just too time consuming.
> Using the poligons as a virtual marker for the regions sounds
> Until you hear those texture where created by someone from Europe.
Hmm, not really. Actually the city textures, like builtup.rgb and
resgrid.rgb, are probably taken from satellite images of some US
resident area. At least it looks like this :-)
As far as I see it, the manual alteration of the c
Jon Stockill wrote:
> We have a more european city texture already - just no way of using it
> on anything but a global scale
Obviously there are different ways to employ different city/whatever
textures. One way would be to manually re-adjust all cities over the
world and assign the appropriate
Jon Stockill wrote:
> Mark wrote:
>
>> Since there is already a PostGIS database for custom scenery
>> contribution in work, I assume this maybe could be added to that
>> database?
>>
>> I agree that localized textures would be a big improvement. The city
>> textures look good for locations in the
Mark wrote:
Since there is already a PostGIS database for custom scenery
contribution in work, I assume this maybe could be added to that database?
I agree that localized textures would be a big improvement. The city
textures look good for locations in the states, but not realistic for
Europe.
B
Mark wrote:
I agree that localized textures would be a big improvement. The city
textures look good for locations in the states, but not realistic for
Europe.
Until you hear those texture where created by someone from Europe.
Erik
--
http://www.ehtw.info (Dutch)Future of Enschede Airport
Since there is already a PostGIS database for custom scenery
contribution in work, I assume this maybe could be added to that database?
I agree that localized textures would be a big improvement. The city
textures look good for locations in the states, but not realistic for
Europe.
But I can't see
Paul Surgeon wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 January 2006 21:44, flightgear wrote:
>
>>I noticed this, too , since the landcover data actually has a large
>>amount of landcovertypes that are currently ignored.
>>So my question is: If somebody would brew up some new textures for these
>>types, is there an
On Wednesday 25 January 2006 21:44, flightgear wrote:
> I noticed this, too , since the landcover data actually has a large
> amount of landcovertypes that are currently ignored.
> So my question is: If somebody would brew up some new textures for these
> types, is there any reason for not using th
I noticed this, too , since the landcover data actually has a large
amount of landcovertypes that are currently ignored.
So my question is: If somebody would brew up some new textures for these
types, is there any reason for not using them?
For example, if you have many textures in a scenery part,
Hi Josh
From: Josh Babcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > 2) ... the current terrain is designed to be seen from above... When
>> > viewing terrain from the side other factors come into play...your
>> > stratum idea and the one I put forward where urban terrain is
presently
>> > designed from a "bi
dene maxwell wrote:
> Hi Josh
>
>
>> From: Josh Babcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> dene maxwell wrote:
>> > Hi Josh
>> > I posted on this subject a couple of weeks ago there was some
>> > discussion as to where the "scaling" of the texture was done
>> > Terragear/FlightGear. There were two poi
Hello Curt,
"Curtis L. Olson" wrote:
> As we've discussed before, OSG is a worthy option, but it is 'not
> trivial' so to speak to switch scene graph libraries out from under such
> a complex application as FlightGear, [...]
I know that my sole intention was to prevent people from
strain
Martin Spott wrote:
Christian Mayer wrote:
Hm, I thought PLIB (i.e. Steve) did like shaders and was just waiting
for OpenGL 2.0. He wanted to do the right solution once it was available
(with shaders and thus multitexturing)...
Do you really expect the PLIB project to issue major imp
Christian Mayer wrote:
> Hm, I thought PLIB (i.e. Steve) did like shaders and was just waiting
> for OpenGL 2.0. He wanted to do the right solution once it was available
> (with shaders and thus multitexturing)...
Do you really expect the PLIB project to issue major improvements ? In
my eyes PLIB
Hi Josh
From: Josh Babcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
dene maxwell wrote:
> Hi Josh
> I posted on this subject a couple of weeks ago there was some
> discussion as to where the "scaling" of the texture was done
> Terragear/FlightGear. There were two points;
>
> 1) ... when viewed from above a 45d
On January 24, 2006 04:54 pm, Josh Babcock wrote:
> The trick is teaching terragear to
> determine what that terrain is and assign it a new landcover type: cliff.
We can teach Terrorgear new tricks? I never knew it has neural net
implemented. ;)
Ampere
-
Christian Mayer wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Curtis L. Olson schrieb:
X-Plane uses some shader language dithering approach which I don't
understand enough to comment on.
This sounds like a good solution
This isn't easy, especially not within the context o
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Curtis L. Olson schrieb:
>
> X-Plane uses some shader language dithering approach which I don't
> understand enough to comment on.
This sounds like a good solution
> This isn't easy, especially not within the context of plib which really
> doesn't li
Here's a better shot:
http://jrbabcock.home.comcast.net/flightgear/three.jpg
Josh
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching yo
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> Or we could find a nice source of free 1 meter per pixel world imagery
> and just drape photoreal textureres over everything.
>
> Curt.
>
I'll start saving for that 80Tb disk drive now ...
Actually, a really neat hack would be to just download the (0.25 m/px)
orthos fr
Josh Babcock wrote:
I. Currently the terrain textures are UV mapped onto the terrain from
directly above. This creates all sorts of problems in steep terrain. One
of those problems is that cliffs and near cliffs look really bad.
Perhaps if terrain with a slope greater than a certain threshold we
dene maxwell wrote:
> Hi Josh
> I posted on this subject a couple of weeks ago there was some
> discussion as to where the "scaling" of the texture was done
> Terragear/FlightGear. There were two points;
>
> 1) ... when viewed from above a 45deg slope will only seem 0.7071 of its
> true length
pott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] two scenery ideas
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 06:53:12 + (UTC)
"dene maxwell" wrote:
> Sort of associated with your river issue i
"dene maxwell" wrote:
> Sort of associated with your river issue is the issue of railways and the
> sections of railways that are through tunnels this particularly effects
> me as two of the longest rail tunnels in the southern hemisphere are in my
> local area and it looks silly to have th
Hi Josh
I posted on this subject a couple of weeks ago there was some discussion
as to where the "scaling" of the texture was done Terragear/FlightGear.
There were two points;
1) ... when viewed from above a 45deg slope will only seem 0.7071 of its
true length. Hence a "stretching" issue
I. Currently the terrain textures are UV mapped onto the terrain from
directly above. This creates all sorts of problems in steep terrain. One
of those problems is that cliffs and near cliffs look really bad.
Perhaps if terrain with a slope greater than a certain threshold were to
be mapped from th
27 matches
Mail list logo
