|
Author
|
Topic: Transparent textures: how efficiant?
|
Sv
Pilot
|
posted 11-28- 02:00 PM
   
While brainstorming for the best way to model the wing support wires of WW1 planes in OpenPlane, Nuum came up with a great idea to use a flat LOD in between wing supports, then just assign a transparent texture to the LOD leaving just the wires opaque. In the screen shot I saw where Nuum implemented this it looked very nice.My question is: How effeciant is this? Would it be better for FPS to model the wires as 3D objects, or does it make more sense to stretch this transparent texture across struts and paint on the "X" wires there? Is a transparent texture slower to render than a normal texture? Any other idea how this should be done? Thanks! ------------------
-Sv =FC=
WWI in SDOE!
IP: Logged |
Whirlwind
Pilot
|
posted 11-28- 05:34 PM
If I am not mistake, I think the Exeter uses lines of some fassion to do the rigging.IP: Logged |
JT
Pilot
|
posted 11-28- 06:26 PM
I don't think one way would be significantly more efficient than the other, so you might as well consider what will look better....I would say just model the wires with long, thin, textureless polygons. A wire is very simple. You would only need 3 polygons per wire to make the wire visible from all sides. Wires created by using partially transparent textures would be invisible if viewed on edge. Also, you have to cover a large area and that means your wires would look very blocky up close if you use textures... especially since you'd be dealing with a lot of diagonals. Don't forget you can use LODs if you're worried about the polygon count. [This message has been edited by JT (edited 11-28-1999).] IP: Logged |
nuum
Pilot
|
posted 11-29- 02:55 AM
Sv, Jt, WhirlwindNow I am trying to model the wires with thin polygons just now, perhaps (like JT remarked) this is the best method. Transparent texture is prettier than polygons but there is some troubles : the wires will blur as you get near. I am experiencing. Sv, Your work is great. Keep on. JT,
Sv and me gonna get into the cockpit stuff.
A lot of questions. nuum
WWI aircraft IP: Logged |
roadtoad
Pilot
|
posted 11-29- 05:53 AM
JT has it right. A simple triangle shape extruded to the length needed is likely the most efficient & least complex method. You can even eliminate them when you build your switchin lods.[This message has been edited by roadtoad (edited 11-29-1999).] IP: Logged |
Dole
Pilot
|
posted 11-29- 06:36 AM
The wires would be really pixelated (and thick) if you did it with textures... unless you used like 4 256x256 textures per set of wires..  but what's the good in that?IP: Logged |
Michael Harrison
General
|
posted 11-29- 07:09 AM
Alpha should be avoided whenever there's a non-alpha way to get the desired effect across.Alpha polys are rendered in a separate pass and slow things down quite a bit if they occupy a significant portion of the screen. I recommend that you use a thin poly for the wire and also billboard it along its major axis. That way, it will turn to follow the viewer and he will never see its edge. IP: Logged |
JT
Pilot
|
posted 11-29- 08:40 AM
>I recommend that you use a thin poly for the wire and also billboard it along its major axis. By "billboard it" do you mean criss-cross it with another long poly or is there actually a way to make polygons turn to always face the viewer... like clouds do? IP: Logged |
Sv
Pilot
|
posted 11-29- 09:03 AM
Thanks MH - I thought about that! Like the tree objects - I read in the OpenPlane Doc that you could set a ploy to always face the user - that is why I suggested a single poly per wire Also I think that this seperate alpha pass is was kills FPS in the pretty new cockpits with the canopy reflections - it is not only increased poly count. I will try the single poly "face the user" approach.. cool! ------------------
-Sv =FC=
WWI in SDOE!
IP: Logged |
FSIC Messageboard
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
