Distance-based levels of detail

Just to andquot;exonerateandquot; Richard <!– s;) –><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_wink.gif" alt=";)" title="Wink" /><!– s;) –>, I should mention that I realized that I [i:dvee0lx8]did[/i:dvee0lx8] change the field-of-view value in the camcfg.dat file, to narrow the field of view of the external cameras. I think this also has the effect of compressing apparent distances, so with my andquot;floatingandquot; cars I’m probably seeing something that wouldn’t be seen under default circumstances. I made that change to the camera a long time ago, so I didn’t even think about it.

Richard, as you know I LOVE 3DC for modelling for MSTS. I have even dabbled with TSM, but in my opinion it doesn’t compare to 3DC. Get to the point, you say <!– s:D –><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_biggrin.gif" alt=":D" title="Very Happy" /><!– s:D –>

The ONLY MSTS feature I would like to see improved at some point is the creation of levels of detail. It would be nice to determine which objects go away at what distances, instead of it being completely automatic (I sometimes have a problem with my bogies disappearing at a long distance, leaving the main body to float).

Also, it would be REEEEALLY nice, albeit more complicated, to even have separate objects for different distances. A perfect example would be wheels–I like my wheels to look fairly round (without using transparency), but that takes a good amount of polygons. At a distance, you wouldn’t be able to tell, so it would be nice to use not-so-round and therefore not-so-resource-consuming wheels at a distance.

Just a couple of ideas from an avid MSTS user ;D

Yes, they do need to be on their own frame to rotate. I really would like to see the screen-shot. (<!– e –><a href="mailto:richard@amabilis.com">richard@amabilis.com</a><!– e –>)

Also, I assume you didn’t make any manual changes to the andquot;sandquot; file?


Nope, no manual changes to the .s file (I don’t do that at all anymore now that you’ve incorporated the andquot;-3andquot; fix). andnbsp;I’ll send you a screenshot this evening when I get home.

Ahh, ok. andnbsp;The machine is smarter than I gave it credit for! andnbsp;:) andnbsp;I didn’t realize that it even simplified the objects for detail levels.

Is there a way to rearrange my bogies so that they are considered andquot;on the main frame,andquot; and not removed at a distance? andnbsp;I really can see them disappear, and when I get home this evening I can send you a screenshot. andnbsp;Don’t they [i:xdwd976n]have[/i:xdwd976n] to be on their own frame to rotate properly?

You can, to some extent, determine the items that will be removed. Any object that is not on the andquot;mainandquot; frame will be removed at 700 meters. I think that is pretty safe, and I am surprised that you can see your model andquot;floatingandquot; at that distance. In my tests I didn’t see that.

Also, objects automatically have their detail level reduced if you select andquot;optimized detail levelsandquot;. Depending on the object, this can make a huge difference. For example I created a test wagon this morning with very detailed wheels. In the andquot;mainandquot; level, visible up to 100 meters it used 824 vertices, but in the following progressions it went to 344, 288, 240, 196, and finally 24 (when the wheels were removed).


You must be logged in to reply in this thread.

6 posts