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

Reply via email to