Is it likely you may also load a Collada from your 3D program in preFab then output an AWD to be used in A3D?
On Feb 26, 5:32 am, richardolsson <[email protected]> wrote: > @Don: > > Let me just reiterate on a basic benchmark I mentioned earlier in the > thread: > > "Some early benchmarks show that a ~60000 triangle mesh in AWD is > about 8% the size of a COLLADA containing nothing but the same mesh, > and parses quicker." > > Hopefully that will be reason enough to get at least some people to > switch over. :) > > Cheers > /R > > On Feb 25, 4:11 pm, "Don Bloomfield" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks - that makes a lot of sense. > > > Don > > Have a great day > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > > > Behalf Of Fabrice3D > > Sent: Saturday, 26 February 2011 12:39 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [away3d] Re: Away 4.0 and Away 3 issues > > > Just because Collada can be seen a good exchange format by some vendors > > doesn't mean its suitable for runtime content. > > if you raytrace a scene for 3 hours, nobody cares if the model took 20 sec > > to load/parse. > > But on web/mobile size/loading/parsing speed are very important. Collada is > > a verboze monster. > > That's why we put efforts into a suitable format. > > > Add to this, that this "standard" format fails totally at one thing: be a > > standard. > > > If you preffer to use Collada for runtime, that's entirely up to you. > > You asked why we think this way... > > > Fabrice > > > On Feb 25, 2011, at 1:05 PM, Don Bloomfield wrote: > > > > Can I ask why you say "COLLADA should never ever be used in the first > > > place..."? > > > > I'm just curious - I use newtek's lightwave, and they seem to be moving TO > > > collada for scene files, and I was looking to move to collada for any > > > animated objects in the future. > > > > Don > > > Have a great day
