On Monday 06 March 2006 02:52, Chris Metzler wrote: > If there's some way to make them not look like white boxes, but rather > like real ground structures look -- whether through texturing, or just > solid material colors on the polys without using textures-- I agree. > Without that, I dunno. <snip> > So the question is, how easy/hard will it be to edit the structures > after generation -- to give them a look other than grey/white boxes? Sure, just open the resulting AC3D file in your favorite 3D modelling tool and apply a material. People can also modify the the svg2ac source code to have this done automatically.
> In response to something I was playing with > a year or two ago, David Megginson made the point to me (and I had > to concede he was right) that scenery objects that look crude (in a > graphics sense) can be worse than if they weren't even there in the > scene at all; they stick out against the more realistic-looking > terrain, runways, etc., and break the user's suspension of disbelief. Of course white boxes would stand out. Once a material has been applied however, the resulting grey boxes should blend in fairly well with FlightGear's scenery at this point in time. > Are they going into invididual .ac files, or one big .ac file for an > entire area (including many buildings)? Or is the plan to provide > some generic wall/roof colors or textures to these structures when > generated? They are one big AC3D file. Ampere ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
