## Re: [Algorithms] LOD scale

 Re: [Algorithms] LOD scale From: Tom Forsyth - 2006-07-02 02:31:46 ```...then you're not putting enough polygons in your models :-) TomF. -----Original Message----- From: gdalgorithms-list-bounces@... [mailto:gdalgorithms-list-bounces@...] On Behalf Of = David Whatley Sent: 01 July 2006 19:12 To: Game Development Algorithms Subject: Re: [Algorithms] LOD scale Actually I'm amazed by how little difference standard geometric LOD = makes these days. With some exceptions (heightmaps), I find that the polygon pushing power of video cards seldom anywhere near being taxed. Try = capping your drawprim calls to a count of 1 sometime and see how little = difference it makes. But dare to switch to a different texture, and kaplow on the frame rate! (grin) Tom Forsyth wrote:=20 No motion blurring. The problem is an object that is moving relative to = the camera, but the player's eye is actually tracking it. So it's a similar = kind of problem to motion-blurring stuff - there is no actual motion *across = the retina* - it's just motion across the screen. It's especially bad if the object moves then stops (or vice versa) - while it's moving, there's a = lower LOD, and then it stops and the LOD suddenly rises. But the player has = been tracking it the whole time, so they see this *change* in the object that they weren't expecting. Overall, I never found the minor speed benefits to be worth the = artifacts of motion-related LOD, or the hassle to fix those artifacts (if such a = thing was even possible). Note that the speed benefits are only optimising for some (fairly rare) cases where lots of stuff is moving - they don't help = the worst case of everything being stationary, and the worst case is what matters to games. Annoyingly, doing more agressive LOD for off-centre objects helps the worst-case performance quite a bit, but it's incredibly obvious and = looks terrible - for exactly the same reasons that using Z-distance or calculated-number-of-screen-pixels for LOD rather than Euclidian = distance - as the camera rotates, objects change their LOD. TomF. =20 -----Original Message----- From: gdalgorithms-list-bounces@...=20 [mailto:gdalgorithms-list-bounces@...] On=20 Behalf Of John Burnett Sent: 28 June 2006 18:22 To: Game Development Algorithms Subject: Re: [Algorithms] LOD scale -----Original Message----- From: Tom Forsyth Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 8:52 PM To: 'Game Development Algorithms' Subject: Re: [Algorithms] LOD scale =20 I've tried both the above - they look terrible. =20 I'm curious, how did it look terrible in the "fast moving=20 object" case? Were you motion blurring? Wondering if that had much to do=20 with it (ie. see the "motion factor" optimization in various offline renderers). John =20 Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, = security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache = Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D= 121642 _______________________________________________ GDAlgorithms-list mailing list GDAlgorithms-list@... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list Archives: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=3D6188 =20 ```