On Fri, 2006-09-22 at 10:48 -0400, Eric Maslowski wrote: > Hi Robert, > Right, that's what I'm wondering. What additional functionality of > MatrixTransform is there that requires them to be a separate level in the > scenegraph and separated from the node it controls? If they are only used > for transforming nodes, and nodes almost always have a single > MatrixTransform directly above them, then why an interface like below isn't > used. > > node->setTrans(Vec3); > node->setOrientation(Quat); > node->setMatrix(Matrixf); > node->setXForm(MatrixTransform); > > Is it so that multiple nodes can share the same xform without needing to > parent each other explicitly? Currently, our environments have shown a 1 > MatrixTransform to 1 Node relationship, and I'm just making sure I > understand the full intentions of the transforms so I can explain it to > others. > > Thanks > > E. > There are many situations where multiple Groups will be placed under a single MatrixTransform, especially when rendering large terrain surfaces. The transform will position the terrain block in the 'world' to reduce precision artifacts, and the terrain geometry will be broken up into smaller groups in a quadtree structure for efficient culling.
Don -- "A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away." -- Barry Goldwater +---------------+ | Don Tidrow | | Vis-Sim geek | +---------------+
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list osg-users@openscenegraph.net http://openscenegraph.net/mailman/listinfo/osg-users http://www.openscenegraph.org/
