Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Study of PerPart LOD for scenery use

Recommended Posts

An investigation into PerPart LOD naming for scenery useby Bob BernsteinAccording to the MakeMdl sdk, this grouping convention will allow GMAX alternate models to be displayed. It does work, but in my current airport project, my attempts to make practical use of this have failed. I decided to study the practical results from various settings. Perhaps this will interest some folks here.This is the SDK words:PerPart LOD naming example: Root_Gear Gear_LOD_100 Gear_LOD_50 Gear_LOD_10 Its easu to apply this to scenery. Make a box, call it whatever_LOD_100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Intersting Bob. I have never really tried it this way. Maybe someone else can give some hints on the distances?Another option might be to export the different LOD models separately and put them all in a library. Then in your macro that calls the library you can place some checks on the distance and in that way simulate the LOD behaviour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have used the discrete LOD a number of times with no problem. The LOD value is a 3 digit number at all times and represents supposedly the pixel size of the object when that particular model should be displayed. No problems so far, except that LOD 000 is read as LOD 100.This whole scheme seems to have an important limitation. The only way to get it to work seems to be exporting the x files and creating a bgl with the LOD models of only that object. Somewhat cumbersome, if this is true.As Arno says, a solution is to create an object library, but then you lose the advantages of the automatic LOD display, and must call the objects depending on their distance, not pixel size. Unless there is a SCASM command that handles pixel size.Best regards.Luis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the commands HSize and VSize also allow you to check the pixel size of the objects. But I don't really see a problem with a distance check either, as the pixel size and the distance are linked to each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guysThe SCASM command you are seeking is IfVSize/IfHSize and programming of LOD models is perfectly straightforward.SCASM has equivalents for ALL commands available in the BGL language and there is very little that cannot be done with SCASM, as long as you know how to program it. But therein lies the problem! E.g. constructing CrashOctTree's and using BGL_ANIMATE animation are both difficult to achieve in manual SCASM code without the help of a design tool like gMax.RegardsGerrish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ArnoThe problem with using distance checks for LOD activation is that they take no account of the view zoom factor, which IfVSize/IfHSize do. MS use IfVSize/IfHSize for LOD effects in their own scenery.CheersGerrish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good reason indeed :D, I didn't think about that. So I'll use HSize and VSize in the future for my LOD models.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey!>As Arno says, a solution is to create an object library, but>then you lose the advantages of the automatic LOD display, and>must call the objects depending on their distance, not pixel>size. Unless there is a SCASM command that handles pixel>size.Do you mean that LODs done with gmax for example (per part LOD) do not work when created as a library object? I have had no problems including several LODs in a library. I did for instance ALS masts this way, they get more detailed when you approach them and they work perfectly.Tatu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tatu, you say you used per part LOD and it got more detailed when you approach. As I pointed out in my first post, my objects got fully detailed before I got very close. Did you actually have it gradually get more detailed, with the final level of detail occurring much closer to the object than I show in my images? If so, would you please post your object names, and relative size of the object?Bob Bernstein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Tatu, you say you used per part LOD and it got more detailed>when you approach. As I pointed out in my first post, my>objects got fully detailed before I got very close. Did you>actually have it gradually get more detailed, with the final>level of detail occurring much closer to the object than I>show in my images? If so, would you please post your object>names, and relative size of the object?Hi!I understood the Per Part LODs so that they reach from 1 to 100, so I have only used LODs up to 100 that's being the most detailed one. Mostly for big objects I use XXX_LOD_100 and XXX_LOD_99, if the radius of an object is big then the change will happen far away. But like my library ALS masts which radius is rather small I had to use different numbers, XXX_LOD_100 and XXX_LOD_55, see the picture. Six first masts are detailed ones and the rest (more yellow ones) are then LOD_55. And PAPIs are LOD_100 and LOD_10, two PAPI units further away show LOD_10 and the two closest ones LOD_100.Was this what you meant?Greetings,TatuEDIT Oh yes, and the visibility for the masts are 2400 meters for each one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this