[ODE] PosR - a better way?

[Jon Watte]

Are your artists actually OK with using scaled meshes? 

Around here, the goal is a fairly uniform density in 
tesselation, so a bigger object gets more triangles (both 
for graphics and for rendering). I guess different cases 
have different needs, though.

Cheers,

			/ h+


-----Original Message-----
From: ode-bounces at q12.org [mailto:ode-bounces at q12.org]On Behalf Of Tim
Rightnour
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 5:28 PM
To: ode-list
Subject: RE: [ODE] PosR - a better way?



On 11-Nov-2004 Jon Watte wrote:
>> 3) It would be really nice to be able to scale an object in a geom
>> transform. 
> 
> With scaling, precision issues get nastier, and translating all the 
> appropriate angular momentums and impulses gets more exciting, 
> especially when they go into the actual LCP solver. Not impossible, 
> I think, but certainly harder.

True.  I don't mind duplicating boxes and spheres.  That doesn't bother me. 
What does bother me, is duplicating a big nasty triangle mesh, just because one
is twice as big as the other.

---
Tim Rightnour <root at garbled.net>
NetBSD: Free multi-architecture OS http://www.netbsd.org/
NetBSD supported hardware database: http://mail-index.netbsd.org/cgi-bin/hw.cgi
_______________________________________________
ODE mailing list
ODE at q12.org
http://q12.org/mailman/listinfo/ode