On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> The proposal is to merge the Display Options and View Options dialog, leaving
> the Rendering Options dialog alone.
This has now been done. Comments welcome as always.
-Stuart
-
Hi Ron,
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Ron Jensen wrote:
> I'm against merging views and rendering dialogs. They perform two distinctly
> different functions. Views simply select which views are cycled through and
> rendering options gets into much detailed and global changes to the way the
> fli
On Monday 08 October 2012 02:20:25 James Turner wrote:
> On 8 Oct 2012, at 07:47, ThorstenB wrote:
> > On 7 Oct 2012, at 15:19, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> >> The use-case is to enable or disable particular views if you don't want
> >> to have to spend ages cycling through them.
> >
> > I also quite l
On 8 Oct 2012, at 07:47, ThorstenB wrote:
> On 7 Oct 2012, at 15:19, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>> The use-case is to enable or disable particular views if you don't want to
>> have to spend ages cycling through them.
>
> I also quite like this option. Some a/c also provide many additional
> custom
On 7 Oct 2012, at 15:19, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> The use-case is to enable or disable particular views if you don't want to
> have to spend ages cycling through them.
I also quite like this option. Some a/c also provide many additional
custom views. It's handy to just enable the personal favouri
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 4:27 PM, James Turner wrote:
> In terms of usability, I never know what's in view vs display options
> until I open them - some restructuring here would be awesome.
> Especially since the 'view options' sounds useful, but in practice I've
> no idea what use-case it fulfils.
Le 07/10/2012 00:13, Stuart Buchanan a écrit :
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Alexis Bory wrote:
>> The idea is NOT to change anything to this standard. Instead, I've
>> just added a tiny option in the Display Options dialog
>
> On balance, I think this new options probably sits best under
On 6 Oct 2012, at 23:13, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> We've currently
> got three different dialog with graphics options
>
> - Rendering Options containing elements such as wireframe, frame-rate
> throttling,
> random objects/trees, shader quality.
> - View Options allowing the user to configure the
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Alexis Bory wrote:
> The idea is NOT to change anything to this standard. Instead, I've just
> added a tiny option in the Display Options dialog:
>
> [ ] Compensate Field of View for wider screens (Disabled by
> default)
>
We've currently
got three differe
Hi all
The default Field of View has been choosen a long time ago and discussed
several times on the devel list.
AFAIK this 55 deg FOV had been settled for two main reasons:
1) There is a need to have a standard FOV across different aircrafts so
the user keeps its space and distance percepti
10 matches
Mail list logo
