Re: [Algorithms] VIPM With T&L - what about roam

[Sam K. <sa...@ip...>]

Rui,

Aha, you've spotted the flaw in my plan.. :)

Pop Pop Pop, Don't you just love it.

I like roam, its quick and you don't have to concern yourself with dirty
VIPM patch-joins its all so seamless.

sam

-----Original Message-----
From: Rui Ferreira <rui...@mo...>
To: gda...@li...
<gda...@li...>
Date: 13 September 2000 10:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Algorithms] VIPM With T&L - what about roam


>A static array of vertices with dynamic indexing sounds interesting, and I
>thought on that too, especially caching stuff on the lower levels patches,
>but the problem is; how do guys handle geomorphing with this scheme ??!
>
>Personally, I dislike roam, except its basic principles like the binary
>triangles concept, diamonds, etc, but what you get with roam, because it
>doesn't reset its mesh every time, is popping when a new child is split,
you
>can minimize it with a morph ratio that takes into account the distance to
>the "to be split" node, and such, but those are all fake approximations and
>you will end up with pop artifacts sooner or later.
>
>True geomorphing can only be done if you set your morphing values *per
node*
>and based on your split metric. Only then you can have a smooth
>interpolation from one node base edge height to the child's real height
from
>frame to frame.
>
>If you "lock" any subtree and cache away its vertices you just lose
>geomorphing.... again i can see ways to minimize this... but... you have a
>mesh, you have vertices connecting edges, you either arrange for your
>vertices positions to translate smoothly or you don't !...
>
>I'm a one true believer in top-down, recurse, apply metric, "split-only"
>algorithms for this very reason.
>
>-Rui Ferreira
>
>_______________________________________________
>GDAlgorithms-list mailing list
>GDA...@li...
>http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list