Hi Marcus,

I prefer not to attach lighting information on material basis, this 
would mean that the number of materials will expand very quickly making 
it harder to expose to the enduser of an application (users tend to 
understand a light as an entity and not a subpart of a material). 
Instead I would opt for the current behaviour or something like states 
that can be "attached" anywhere in the scenegraph and finally collected 
by the render traversal. For example it could be useful to enable 
wireframe rendering somewhere in the tree as well as controling 
lighting. I think this has been already discussed by the coreteam, but 
I am not sure what the final conclusion was.

About global light sources I tend to disagree with the current solution. 
Of course I understand Dirk's reasoning, but dealing with importing 
other systems files one has to reorder the scenegraph and sometimes it 
is not possible to achieve a 1:1 mapping. A flag indicating if a light 
is local/global would be a nice option for me as an application 
developer.

Regards

Matthias

> Just to toss an idea:
>
> I've previously worked with commercial scene graph which required the
> user to attach the light to each lit geometry. (The light-node's
> position was used as light position). Could that be folded into a
> "LightsChunk" (or whatever you may call it) that would keep a list of
> lights to be applied, this moving it into the material?
>
> This is not at all what you do today though.


-- 
+---------------------+----------------------------+
| VREC GmbH           |                            |
| Matthias Stiller    |                            |
| Robert-Bosch-Str. 7 | tel:    +49 6151 4921034   |
| 64293 Darmstadt     | web:    http://www.vrec.de |
| Germany             | mail:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]         |
+---------------------+----------------------------+


_______________________________________________
Opensg-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users

Reply via email to