Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
* till busch -- Thursday 10 April 2008: Currently Aircraft/ is ~1200 MB on cvs. So yes. I think we can easily afford 100 or 200 MB for cheap ai models. I don't mind spending 200MB for something useful. But I think that 200MB for a mere duplication of existing files is a waste. I'd opt for inclusion of as many AI (lightweight) aircraft as possible. People who try FG, will see other models that they like, and will eventually download them. If it's only about a motivation to download the real aircraft, then a dialog on exit is just as effective. And it's questionable whether crappy/blurry AI aircraft are such a big motivation at all. Maybe just the opposite. And high-quality duplicated AI files are a no-go IMHO. Because you'd then come much closer to the 1200MB. The *.ac and texture files are the biggest parts of an aircraft after all, only instruments and sounds wouldn't be duplicated (and the usually smallish nasal and xml files). Could you propose a more detailed design that would allow all of that? I would volunteer to write the necessary code. A possible solution and compromise could be: - $FG_ROOT/AI/Aircraft/ contains stripped down (model details and texture sizes) of all relevant aircraft, no matter if the aircraft is installed. Non-relevant ones are Ogel and Colditz, for example). - there's a property/option that controls whether such rather low quality models are used or not. They are somewhat ugly, but may or may not be considered better than nothing. - as soon as the real aircraft is installed ($FG_ROOT/Aircraft/), this takes precedence over AI/Aircraft/. Proper LOD setup in $FG_ROOT/Aircraft/*/ makes sure that this comes at low cost in the MP case. An additional flag disable-on-mp/ or something added to an animation could be used to completely remove it in the MP case. (We might need a way to scale down textures, too?) I don't like the current setup much where MP-LOD is split off the real aircraft and resides in a separate dir. That's somewhat unclean. - aircraft could contain an indicator of their costs, so that one could set an option at startup to only display aircraft cheaper than some threshold. m. - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
--- On Wed, 9/4/08, Durk Talsma wrote: I do forsee that adding loads of AI aircraft could add to the size of the release version of the base package. That being the case, we could consider spawning off a separately downloadable, optional AI aircraft package (including not only aircraft, but also traffic files, etc etc). Without wanting to put words into his mouth, I assume that is Melchior's (and others) main concern, rather than the size of our CVS repository itself. Frankly, if we are worried about the size of the repository, we need to create a repository for new aircraft. But that is a different discussion... A separate AI download is a nice idea, but I think it has some issues itself: - It would increase the user workload, and realistically the support workload on here and the forums. I've found that user's rarely read our manual, wiki or FAQ before posting questions. - We (well, probably you Durk!) would have an extra package to manage during the release cycle. - We'd have to document installing it, which is quite a bit harder than you'd expect when dealing with MacOS and people who exclusively use the wizard. -Stuart ___ Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
-- On Wed, 9/4/08, AJ MacLeod wrote: On Wednesday 09 April 2008 16:20:05 Stuart Buchanan wrote: How about the following - Maximum size 250KB. - All textures converted to PNG and scaled to 1/4 size in both dimensions. Does that seem reasonable? I think we have two slightly differing concepts of what the MP/AI aircraft are all about. In my view, they are a nice way of providing (at minimal effort to modellers) versions of each aircraft which are visually complete from external views while being very significantly quicker to load than their full counterparts (the vast majority of textures, animations and polys are generally found in the cockpits of most of our more complete models.) Well, this was my original idea behind creating them by chopping out the bits that weren't required. My assumption was that the cost of making these available to all users was sufficiently low to make it a no-brainer. That assumption appears to be false. I don't, however, see any harm in someone providing an optional MP aircraft pack download that provides what Stuart would like to achieve, for those who want it... That would suggest simply providing AI/Aircraft as a separate download. -Stuart ___ Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
On Wednesday 09 April 2008, Stuart Buchanan wrote: --- On Wed, 9/4/08, Melchior FRANZ wrote: Do we really want MP support for all aircraft in the base package, at a cost of an extra 200 MB of data? Wrappers are fine (like Vivian described), but do we want a complete concorde.ac with all textures *again* in the AI/ dir? If someone wants the Concorde displayed, then s/he can install it, no? Currently Aircraft/ is ~1200 MB on cvs. So yes. I think we can easily afford 100 or 200 MB for cheap ai models. As you name the Concorde. The whole dir currently takes 19 MB. If someone adds a Concorde that takes up to 2 MB, that would be fine. Yes, I strongly think that there would be a real benefit for everyone who uses the base package to be able to see all MP aircraft. As well as making the MP experience faster (which everyone would benefit from), I think it would make it richer for new users. There is another problem that i see here. There will be a day, when we will need to decide, which aircraft will go into the base package. For someone who just wants to try FlightGear the base package shouldn't be too large. We might want to have about twenty well-designed and fully-functional aircraft in the base package at the end. I'd opt for inclusion of as many AI (lightweight) aircraft as possible. People who try FG, will see other models that they like, and will eventually download them. Even though I have a fairly fast machine, MP flying around KSFO is still marginal. It is likely to get worse as the number and complexity of aircraft increase. Creating AI models (and also promoting a culture of creating AI models for all new aircraft) would go a long to helping this. Yes. I'm all for promoting a culture of creating AI models for all aircraft. In that context, another 50 - 100MB of data in the base package seems reasonable. I agree. I think it should be possible to create AI aircraft at less than, say, 500KB per aircraft, which would grow the base package by less than 100MB. For example, the Vulcan AI model is around 200KB. If they can be that cheap it is perfect. IMHO we can't be too restrictive here, though. Some aircraft will need a little more space. I'd prefer fgfs to show better information about which aircraft couldn't be shown because they aren't installed, and a better LOD concept (LOD in the aircraft dir, where it belongs). I very much like this idea, Melchior. We would need to come up with a solution that would allow us to easily deliver many low-LOD models (for multiplayer-support) with the base package. And then, there has to be an easy way to upgrade to the full aircraft. Could you propose a more detailed design that would allow all of that? I would volunteer to write the necessary code. How about the following - Maximum size 250KB. - All textures converted to PNG and scaled to 1/4 size in both dimensions. Does that seem reasonable? This seems like a hard limit. I really don't want to see plenty of aircraft with crappy textures. Lightweight aircraft should still look pretty from the outside -- even when standing right next to them. Reducing the texture size is fine, but please check that it will still look nice. cheers, - till - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
--- On Wed, 9/4/08, Vivian Meazza wrote: 1. A long time ago in the early days of MP the policy was agreed: If you don't have it you don't see it. No glider, no ufo, nothing. And AFAIK that's still the case. IF we want to depart from this long standing policy, then that's a slightly different debate. I think the v1.0 release has seen a step-change in the use of FG. There are a large number of new (often quite young) users who are generally inhabit the forums rather than the lists. They are tending to use MP all the time, as it is part of their expectations of the system (I'm guessing because they have a background in games like World of Warcraft). Given this, making all the aircraft easily and cheaply available of MP seems a no-brainer to me. IMO the argument is really about how large these aircraft should be, and whether they should be part of the release base-package or not. 4. We don't seriously think that OSG is fit for a release this side of Christmas do we? Should we really be using .png in anything other than osg only models such as the Buccaneer, and even then I think I removed all .png textures from the AI/MP version. (And now I'm going to have to :-)) Yes, I think OSG is going to be fit for release, and quite soon. In fact, setting a target for an OSG release sometime this summer might be a good way to encourage the bugs and rough edges to be smoothed out. -Stuart ___ Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
--- On Wed, 9/4/08, Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Stuart Buchanan -- Wednesday 09 April 2008: --- On Wed, 9/4/08, Melchior FRANZ wrote: So, please let's discuss that first, before anyone dumps more of that stuff into $FG_ROOT/AI/! Hence my original post - discussion is good. Yes, discussion is good. But the original post was already a bit past the point where an RFC would have been in order. You had already started with copying textures and asked others to do the same. Time to take a break. Mea culpa. I screwed up and should have posted before committing. My apologies to all. This idea was a lot more contentious than I expected at the time... In that context, another 50 - 100MB of data in the base package seems reasonable. Sound like a rather low estimation to me. Especially considering that helijah adds 5 aircraft every week. :-) Well, I'm not sure I can keep up with that rate ;) How about the following - Maximum size 250KB. - All textures converted to PNG and scaled to 1/4 size in both dimensions. Does that seem reasonable? Maybe. I'd like others to comment on that. I never claimed that it's on me to decide. But I'd like to have such things discussed beforeI don't think that's likely in the near term. Also they are done. You probably know that committing a file means that it will be in CVS *forever*, even if you cvs rm it right after that. No I didn't know that, but thinking about it for 5 minutes should have made me realize that it was probably the case. Whatever we come up with,I don't think that's likely in the near term. Also it would be nice if the LOD handling could always load the full aircraft version if you are very close. Seeing a blurry box parked next to you isn't pretty either. I guess that's a possibility, but I'd prefer not to have a huge new model load just as I start flying formation with another aircraft... ;) -Stuart ___ Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
On Thursday 10 April 2008 09:19:04 Stuart Buchanan wrote: Without wanting to put words into his mouth, I assume that is Melchior's (and others) main concern, rather than the size of our CVS repository itself. My main concern would rather be the infliction of low poly, blurry textured, largely unanimated models on the MP world all for a possible slight improvement in performance for those with older hardware (slight over the alternative skeleton aircraft method already used by most of our MP/AI aircraft and mentioned by Vivian). My secondary concern would be duplication of models, where that isn't really necessary (the Lightning, for example, has a fairly simple external model with relatively few textures; why duplicate that when it's easy to just load that and not the many large cockpit related textures and polys?) It's also normally easier for a modeller to just modify the model.xml to not load stuff than to create a new 3d model and textures. I do share your concerns about a separate AI models package for download (in terms of maintenance / documentation / user assistance workload); I personally think the current system is very fair - if you want to see the models, download them! Cheers, AJ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
Hi all, Stuart Buchanan wrote: I think the v1.0 release has seen a step-change in the use of FG. There are a large number of new (often quite young) users who are generally inhabit the forums rather than the lists. They are tending to use MP all the time, as it is part of their expectations of the system (I'm guessing because they have a background in games like World of Warcraft). Yes the average profile of our users is changing (as the hardware they use) the forums shows much more hi definition and cosmetic features requests than lower hardware use requests. It seems that for those who fly mostly on MP, the AI model should have a good definition and a complete set of external animations. Also the AI aircrafts should have a good external texturing (like our standard 512*512 to 1024*1024 texture). Note that users begin to propose huge textures and that reflects a need. About modeling a new model for AI aircrafts: I agree with AJ and I would prefer not to. I would better think about a new XML file to be read at first on MP loading so FG just load a simplified model without the cockpit and all the avionic nasal, also it disable unnecessary external animations. Given this, making all the aircraft easily and cheaply available of MP seems a no-brainer to me. IMO the argument is really about how large these aircraft should be, and whether they should be part of the release base-package or not. About where to put AI aircrafts. Yes there is no point in putting too many thing in the base package. who wants to D/L the whole army stuff while setting up a C172 simulator for the local Aero Club ? And for those who like to play RedFlag, its more a fun to fetch here and there addons to complete their game (thats quite a marketing plus). About scenery: I committed recently 2 *very* low poly aircraft in data/Models/Aircraft. The Aircraft models here are intented to be there for static display on scenery airports, they are 250 to 600 KB sized and don't have any animation. A realistic airport could have tenth of them dispatched every where, That is compatible with AI Traffic which use nicer and animated models. That's all, Alexis - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
On Thursday 10 April 2008 09:36:36 Stuart Buchanan wrote: Mea culpa. I screwed up and should have posted before committing. My apologies to all. This idea was a lot more contentious than I expected at the time... Hey, we needed something to argue about to resuscitate the list ;-) Cheers, AJ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
Hello, I think this is worthwhile as: 1) It will mean that for the next release, all MP users will be able to see all the other users, even if they don't have a specific aircraft installed. 2) A dedicated AI model is cheaper than a heavily LoD'd aircraft model. 3) For the majority of aircraft, once the initial model has been created, little changes that would be visible to another MP user, so keeping an AI model in sync with a main model is not too difficult. Yes, I think this is definately a good idea! To create them I did the following: - Copied over the complete aircraft directory from $FG_DATA/Aircraft to $FG_DATA/AI/Aircraft - Removed any extraneous files/directories (-set.xml, FDM, Panels, sounds), typically just leaving a Model directory. - Use ImageMagick to convert any .rgb textures to png. - Use a text editor to replace all the .rgb references to .png - Hacked out all the cockpit, sub-models and irrelevant animations from the model .xml file. Sounds to me as if this process could somehow be automated. Is it possible to not load everything when loading an aircraft model? Then you would not have to create an extra AI model for every aircraft, but just change the code to only load what is appropriate. Regards, Tobias begin:vcard fn:Tobias Ramforth n:Ramforth;Tobias email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] x-mozilla-html:FALSE version:2.1 end:vcard signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
* Stuart Buchanan -- Wednesday 09 April 2008: - Use ImageMagick to convert any .rgb textures to png. We certainly don't want redundant texture duplicates in $FG_ROOT/AI/. Did you scale them down or do anything else that justifies this step? If not, then just refer to the original textures (converting those to PNG if you want). m. - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
--- On Wed, 9/4/08, Melchior FRANZ wrote: We certainly don't want redundant texture duplicates in $FG_ROOT/AI/. Did you scale them down or do anything else that justifies this step? If not, then just refer to the original textures (converting those to PNG if you want). As I mentioned in my reply to Vivian, I don't want any dependency on the Aircraft tree, as the user may not have the full aircraft present on their system. One of my aims is that a user with just the base package will be able to see all the aircraft in MP sessions without having to download them. I haven't scaled any of the textures down, though the conversion from .rgb to .png reduced the size quite significantly. I will look at resizing them. -Stuart ___ Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
On Wednesday 09 April 2008 08:37, Stuart Buchanan wrote: [snip...] I'd like to create more AI aircraft, but obviously this is something that might step on the toes of the aircraft maintainers. So, if you are an aircraft maintainer, and would be happy for me to create an AI version of your aircraft using the process above, please drop me a line on-list. Comments on whether this is a good idea are very welcome. -Stuart Please feel free to create AI versions of any of the aircraft I've done (although check with Vivian, Alexis and Josh B re the SeaHawk, A-10 Canberra B(I)8 as they added the 3D panels and really maintain them now. Of the remaining aircraft I've done, only the MiG-15bis has a partial 3D panel. However, a lot of them do have complex animations and/or complex 2D instruments and Nasal that could be stripped e.g. an AI version of the AN-225 probably doesn't need independent compression animation for all of it's 16 wheel-sets:) LeeE - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
* Stuart Buchanan -- Wednesday 09 April 2008: As I mentioned in my reply to Vivian, I don't want any dependency on the Aircraft tree, You don't want that, fine. And *I* don't want a parallel structure of aircraft with megabytes of duplicated files. So, please let's discuss that first, before anyone dumps more of that stuff into $FG_ROOT/AI/! Do we really want MP support for all aircraft in the base package, at a cost of an extra 200 MB of data? Wrappers are fine (like Vivian described), but do we want a complete concorde.ac with all textures *again* in the AI/ dir? If someone wants the Concorde displayed, then s/he can install it, no? I'd prefer fgfs to show better information about which aircraft couldn't be shown because they aren't installed, and a better LOD concept (LOD in the aircraft dir, where it belongs). And if we really want the independence, then we should make sure that this is cheap. Textures should be scaled down a *lot*, the model should be drastically poly-reduced, the whole aircraft shouldn't take more than 250 kB (or something). And we don't need MP-versions of Ogel, wrightfligher and others. m. - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
Melchior FRANZ wrote * Stuart Buchanan -- Wednesday 09 April 2008: As I mentioned in my reply to Vivian, I don't want any dependency on the Aircraft tree, You don't want that, fine. And *I* don't want a parallel structure of aircraft with megabytes of duplicated files. So, please let's discuss that first, before anyone dumps more of that stuff into $FG_ROOT/AI/! Do we really want MP support for all aircraft in the base package, at a cost of an extra 200 MB of data? Wrappers are fine (like Vivian described), but do we want a complete concorde.ac with all textures *again* in the AI/ dir? If someone wants the Concorde displayed, then s/he can install it, no? I'd prefer fgfs to show better information about which aircraft couldn't be shown because they aren't installed, and a better LOD concept (LOD in the aircraft dir, where it belongs). And if we really want the independence, then we should make sure that this is cheap. Textures should be scaled down a *lot*, the model should be drastically poly-reduced, the whole aircraft shouldn't take more than 250 kB (or something). And we don't need MP-versions of Ogel, wrightfligher and others. m. If you install the .ac file, the model file, slightly amended, and the textures, you might as well go the whole hog and install the complete aircraft. Stuart's proposal will significantly increase the size of the base package. I'm inclined towards Melchior's view on this one. V. - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
What are AI Aircraft models? Lee Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Stuart Buchanan -- Wednesday 09 April 2008: As I mentioned in my reply to Vivian, I don't want any dependency on the Aircraft tree, You don't want that, fine. And *I* don't want a parallel structure of aircraft with megabytes of duplicated files. So, please let's discuss that first, before anyone dumps more of that stuff into $FG_ROOT/AI/! Do we really want MP support for all aircraft in the base package, at a cost of an extra 200 MB of data? Wrappers are fine (like Vivian described), but do we want a complete concorde.ac with all textures *again* in the AI/ dir? If someone wants the Concorde displayed, then s/he can install it, no? I'd prefer fgfs to show better information about which aircraft couldn't be shown because they aren't installed, and a better LOD concept (LOD in the aircraft dir, where it belongs). And if we really want the independence, then we should make sure that this is cheap. Textures should be scaled down a *lot*, the model should be drastically poly-reduced, the whole aircraft shouldn't take more than 250 kB (or something). And we don't need MP-versions of Ogel, wrightfligher and others. m. - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
--- On Wed, 9/4/08, Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Stuart Buchanan -- Wednesday 09 April 2008: As I mentioned in my reply to Vivian, I don't want any dependency on the Aircraft tree, You don't want that, fine. And *I* don't want a parallel structure of aircraft with megabytes of duplicated files. I could have worded that better as the following: I don't think there is any benefit to adding AI aircraft if they have a dependency on the Aircraft tree. So, please let's discuss that first, before anyone dumps more of that stuff into $FG_ROOT/AI/! Hence my original post - discussion is good. In my opinion, adding AI version of the aircraft I maintain was reasonable, they are fairly small anyway, and converting to png etc. makes them smaller. Do we really want MP support for all aircraft in the base package, at a cost of an extra 200 MB of data? Wrappers are fine (like Vivian described), but do we want a complete concorde.ac with all textures *again* in the AI/ dir? If someone wants the Concorde displayed, then s/he can install it, no? Yes, I strongly think that there would be a real benefit for everyone who uses the base package to be able to see all MP aircraft. As well as making the MP experience faster (which everyone would benefit from), I think it would make it richer for new users. Even though I have a fairly fast machine, MP flying around KSFO is still marginal. It is likely to get worse as the number and complexity of aircraft increase. Creating AI models (and also promoting a culture of creating AI models for all new aircraft) would go a long to helping this. In that context, another 50 - 100MB of data in the base package seems reasonable. I think it should be possible to create AI aircraft at less than, say, 500KB per aircraft, which would grow the base package by less than 100MB. For example, the Vulcan AI model is around 200KB. Some aircraft are going to be much easier to make AI versions of than others, and some may require the .ac file to be edited. Most of my aircraft are almost trivial in complexity. I'd prefer fgfs to show better information about which aircraft couldn't be shown because they aren't installed, and a better LOD concept (LOD in the aircraft dir, where it belongs). And if we really want the independence, then we should make sure that this is cheap. Textures should be scaled down a *lot*, the model should be drastically poly-reduced, the whole aircraft shouldn't take more than 250 kB (or something). And we don't need MP-versions of Ogel, wrightfligher and others. How about the following - Maximum size 250KB. - All textures converted to PNG and scaled to 1/4 size in both dimensions. Does that seem reasonable? -Stuart ___ Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
- Maximum size 250KB. - All textures converted to PNG and scaled to 1/4 size in both dimensions. Does that seem reasonable? -Stuart Hi, I like the idea by Stuart. But the discussion sounds like we will have a next release in a few weeks. And will it be for sure that the next release will be OSG? Unfortunately png isn't supported by plib (?), so I#m not sure about this issue... Cheers HHS still in work: http://www.hoerbird.net/galerie.html But already done: http://www.hoerbird.net/reisen.html __ Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail. Der Lieblings-Mailbox der Welt. http://de.overview.mail.yahoo.com - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
- Maximum size 250KB. - All textures converted to PNG and scaled to 1/4 size in both dimensions. Does that seem reasonable? -Stuart Hi, I like the idea by Stuart. But the discussion sounds like we will have a next release in a few weeks. And will it be for sure that the next release will be OSG? Unfortunately png isn't supported by plib (?), so I#m not sure about this issue... Cheers HHS still in work: http://www.hoerbird.net/galerie.html But already done: http://www.hoerbird.net/reisen.html __ Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail. Der Lieblings-Mailbox der Welt. http://de.overview.mail.yahoo.com - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
To M.S., who sent me a private hate-mail: don't do that! Better send that to the list for public entertainment. One doesn't see often how a grown up man goes *that* low and throws away all remaining credibility and decency! I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: O Lord make my enemies ridiculous. And God granted it. -- Voltaire * Stuart Buchanan -- Wednesday 09 April 2008: --- On Wed, 9/4/08, Melchior FRANZ wrote: So, please let's discuss that first, before anyone dumps more of that stuff into $FG_ROOT/AI/! Hence my original post - discussion is good. Yes, discussion is good. But the original post was already a bit past the point where an RFC would have been in order. You had already started with copying textures and asked others to do the same. Time to take a break. Yes, I strongly think that there would be a real benefit for everyone who uses the base package to be able to see all MP aircraft. Of course there would. That's no question. But it comes at a price and we have to think about whether it's affordable, and if this is the way to go. *Not* seeing an aircraft isn't a big problem, one that justifies paying a high price. I for one am right now *not* seeing an aircraft in my room. Doesn't annoy me one bit. ;-) In that context, another 50 - 100MB of data in the base package seems reasonable. Sound like a rather low estimation to me. Especially considering that helijah adds 5 aircraft every week. :-) How about the following - Maximum size 250KB. - All textures converted to PNG and scaled to 1/4 size in both dimensions. Does that seem reasonable? Maybe. I'd like others to comment on that. I never claimed that it's on me to decide. But I'd like to have such things discussed before they are done. You probably know that committing a file means that it will be in CVS *forever*, even if you cvs rm it right after that. (Yes, Curt can remove it from the server.) Whatever we come up with, it would be nice if the LOD handling could always load the full aircraft version if you are very close. Seeing a blurry box parked next to you isn't pretty either. m. - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
On Wednesday 09 April 2008 15:38, Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Stuart Buchanan -- Wednesday 09 April 2008: As I mentioned in my reply to Vivian, I don't want any dependency on the Aircraft tree, You don't want that, fine. And *I* don't want a parallel structure of aircraft with megabytes of duplicated files. I object against adding dependencies on the main Aircraft directories. When we get ready for the next release, This is going to bite us severely for all the good reasons Stuart explained. FWIW, I proposed the AI/Aircraft directory originally to contain many light weight models that were originally intended for use by the computer controlled AI system. As such, the AI directory was supposed to contain many additional texture directories for all the different liveries, this implies that the AI/Aircraft could potentially grow quite a bit. The fact that we also store some copies of liveries used in the main directory only adds a small percentage to the overall size of the package. The fact that these aircraft could also be used in multiplayer environment is a nice bonus. For these reasons, I consider the argument that these copies add an unacceptable increase of the base package largely void. After all, we also don't have a policy for NOT adding new aircraft to the base package, so the size of the CVS repository can't be an issue at all. I do forsee that adding loads of AI aircraft could add to the size of the release version of the base package. That being the case, we could consider spawning off a separately downloadable, optional AI aircraft package (including not only aircraft, but also traffic files, etc etc). This would be a point worth discussing. Keep the AI/Aircraft directory separate from the main aircraft directory is a complete no-brainer in my opinion. Cheers, Durk - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
Georg Vollnhals wrote Durk Talsma schrieb: On Wednesday 09 April 2008 15:38, Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Stuart Buchanan -- Wednesday 09 April 2008: As I mentioned in my reply to Vivian, I don't want any dependency on the Aircraft tree, You don't want that, fine. And *I* don't want a parallel structure of aircraft with megabytes of duplicated files. I object against adding dependencies on the main Aircraft directories. When we get ready for the next release, This is going to bite us severely for all the good reasons Stuart explained. FWIW, I proposed the AI/Aircraft directory originally to contain many light weight models that were originally intended for use by the computer controlled AI system. As such, the AI directory was supposed to contain many additional texture directories for all the different liveries, this implies that the AI/Aircraft could potentially grow quite a bit. The fact that we also store some copies of liveries used in the main directory only adds a small percentage to the overall size of the package. The fact that these aircraft could also be used in multiplayer environment is a nice bonus. For these reasons, I consider the argument that these copies add an unacceptable increase of the base package largely void. After all, we also don't have a policy for NOT adding new aircraft to the base package, so the size of the CVS repository can't be an issue at all. I do forsee that adding loads of AI aircraft could add to the size of the release version of the base package. That being the case, we could consider spawning off a separately downloadable, optional AI aircraft package (including not only aircraft, but also traffic files, etc etc). This would be a point worth discussing. Keep the AI/Aircraft directory separate from the main aircraft directory is a complete no-brainer in my opinion. Cheers, Durk From the viewpoint of a scenery-designer I fully agree with having at least low-texture - and if possible lower poly - AI aircraft models. It is very easy to have some of these lighter-weighted aircraft placed in the scenery without framerate-punishment. So I did with EDDV and EDDW and following the English Forum there are others who do the same. So there are 3 arguments to have an independent AI aircraft folder - may be separated as an extra downloadable package : 1. Improving the MP framerate situation 2. Using them for AI traffic 3. Using them for scenery design 1. A long time ago in the early days of MP the policy was agreed: If you don't have it you don't see it. No glider, no ufo, nothing. And AFAIK that's still the case. IF we want to depart from this long standing policy, then that's a slightly different debate. 2. MP aircraft should be reasonably lightweight, but with good texture, fully animated and no interior detail. A good way to achieve this is by using the data already available in the main model file. This is good data management practice, and avoids duplication. I would think this also applies for AI Aircraft for the traffic manager; here of course you might want textures in the AI/Aircraft directory, but not necessarily. 3. Dead, low poly models for inclusion in scenery should join those already available in Models/Aircraft. Even then the option exists for using a wrapper for textures in the main Aircraft file if this is appropriate. 4. We don't seriously think that OSG is fit for a release this side of Christmas do we? Should we really be using .png in anything other than osg only models such as the Buccaneer, and even then I think I removed all .png textures from the AI/MP version. (And now I'm going to have to :-)) Vivian - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
Melchior FRANZ wrote: To M.S., who sent me a private hate-mail: don't do that! Better send that to the list for public entertainment. One doesn't see often how a grown up man goes *that* low and throws away all remaining credibility and decency! I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: O Lord make my enemies ridiculous. And God granted it. -- Voltaire So let's see it ;) But seriously, I can't decide either way . I have added my own low res models to the AI directory , with cockpits removed in some , transparencies removed ,etc... But I also ran into error's with PLIB AI models that used png's , and I'm sure I'm guilty there. Can't confirm until I recompile though . That will be tonight's project .. Cheers, Syd - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
