On Jan 10, 2008 5:27 PM, Jean-Sébastien Guay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry for the little info, don't really know what to give. The osgdem > without --terrain just finished, it worked and looks great. Running > with --terrain ran a lot faster, but I can't see anything in osgviewer > with the resulting file. The file is over twice the size (~500k versus > ~202k without --terrain). It doesn't really matter either way - I was > just trying it out.
Something is amiss, --terrain normally results in smaller files. I haven't seen any problem with rendering of them either. Any chance you could make available the data and osgdem commndline you've used? > Thanks, I'll look those up. Geotiffs are the most common/useful, is > that correct? (just assuming from what I've read in the past on this > list) Any data with geospatial coords system assigned to them will work pretty well, GeoTiff is the most common one for imagery. Image and DEM's without geospatial coord system are a pain as you have to manually specify things. Robert. _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@lists.openscenegraph.org http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org