User talk:Bigstones: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Switch to the {{forum link}} template for all forum links.
(→‎Wikipedia links: Template:Wikipedia is now deployed)
(Switch to the {{forum link}} template for all forum links.)
 
Line 10: Line 10:
I saw you recent edits related to the [http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=File_Formats&oldid=70496#apt.dat_file apt.dat] formats, in particular [http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=File_Formats&diff=prev&oldid=70496 this one].  I do not know how many outside the developer and/or the scenery development/enhancement communities that are aware of the following, but it seems to go by word of mouth.
I saw you recent edits related to the [http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=File_Formats&oldid=70496#apt.dat_file apt.dat] formats, in particular [http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=File_Formats&diff=prev&oldid=70496 this one].  I do not know how many outside the developer and/or the scenery development/enhancement communities that are aware of the following, but it seems to go by word of mouth.


According to some forum posts ([http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=203717&sid=6666d65008b67789b89ec782edb173b9#p203717 ], [http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=188590#p188590]) it seems that genapts support both apt.dat formats 810, 850 and 1000, but unfortunately the terragear developers are not very clear on what formats terragear and/or genapts actually support, in fact can't find it in [https://gitorious.org/fg/terragear/source/master: terragear's readme files].
According to some forum posts ({{forum link|p=203717}}, {{forum link|p=188590}}) it seems that genapts support both apt.dat formats 810, 850 and 1000, but unfortunately the terragear developers are not very clear on what formats terragear and/or genapts actually support, in fact can't find it in [https://gitorious.org/fg/terragear/source/master: terragear's readme files].


In other words it seems for now that in FlightGear lingo 810 represents X-plane apt.dat 810 and older formats while 850 represents 850 and newer formats, if that is any help.  I do not really like the inconsistency and ambiguity of that.
In other words it seems for now that in FlightGear lingo 810 represents X-plane apt.dat 810 and older formats while 850 represents 850 and newer formats, if that is any help.  I do not really like the inconsistency and ambiguity of that.
Line 45: Line 45:
Cheers
Cheers
--[[User:HHS|HHS]] ([[User talk:HHS|talk]]) 10:47, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
--[[User:HHS|HHS]] ([[User talk:HHS|talk]]) 10:47, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
:Hi HHS, thank you for the interest. My computer is already getting old (6 y.o., graphics card 4 y.o.) and I have no problems with shaders, only Rembrandt shadows seem to be heavy. For when I'm done, my computer ''will'' be definitely old, so I hope using lightmaps is ok. Anyway, I don't know if you've read my forum post, but I'm already using sun-angle-rad directly and I am not satisfied (details [http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=208080#p208080 in the post]). Also, there's no need for nasal to simply use that as a factor (see [[Howto:Lightmap]], using Effect/model-combined-deferred is just more verbose - BTW, I'm not satisfied with this second effect and I'll post about that too).
:Hi HHS, thank you for the interest. My computer is already getting old (6 y.o., graphics card 4 y.o.) and I have no problems with shaders, only Rembrandt shadows seem to be heavy. For when I'm done, my computer ''will'' be definitely old, so I hope using lightmaps is ok. Anyway, I don't know if you've read my forum post, but I'm already using sun-angle-rad directly and I am not satisfied (details {{forum link|p=208080|text=in the post}}). Also, there's no need for nasal to simply use that as a factor (see [[Howto:Lightmap]], using Effect/model-combined-deferred is just more verbose - BTW, I'm not satisfied with this second effect and I'll post about that too).


:The idea is to use a single script in one of the models, which would add an adjusted 'sun-angle-rad' to the property tree, and use ''that'' as a factor for lightmaps. LOWI is already doing that, its version of your script is linked in my forum post.
:The idea is to use a single script in one of the models, which would add an adjusted 'sun-angle-rad' to the property tree, and use ''that'' as a factor for lightmaps. LOWI is already doing that, its version of your script is linked in my forum post.
Line 65: Line 65:


Also, we have quite a few "troubleshooting" article that would greatly benefit from being cleaned up, or stuff like [[Hardware Recommendations]].
Also, we have quite a few "troubleshooting" article that would greatly benefit from being cleaned up, or stuff like [[Hardware Recommendations]].
Recently, some forum users also expressed some interest in possibly helping with this-for example, Jabberwocky made a number of suggestions[http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=22728&hilit=&start=15#p206713]. So you  may want to get in touch or directly team up?
Recently, some forum users also expressed some interest in possibly helping with this-for example, Jabberwocky made a number of suggestions {{forum link|p=206713}}. So you  may want to get in touch or directly team up?


You already looked at some others, but these are fairly involved if you don't know about programming already, e.g.:
You already looked at some others, but these are fairly involved if you don't know about programming already, e.g.:
Line 80: Line 80:
:: * [[How the FlightGear project works]]  (argh... couldn't we just copy Thorsten's version?)
:: * [[How the FlightGear project works]]  (argh... couldn't we just copy Thorsten's version?)
::: please leave it alone then, Thorsten's version is much better - but we've seen forum feedback suggesting that people actually do read the whole thing (which cover quite a bit other stuff), and the view numbers seem to confirm this: 3600 vs. over 10k for the wiki article. It was never "written", it was just copied together from forum responses...i.e. flame wars that would have been pointless otherwise --[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 21:56, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
::: please leave it alone then, Thorsten's version is much better - but we've seen forum feedback suggesting that people actually do read the whole thing (which cover quite a bit other stuff), and the view numbers seem to confirm this: 3600 vs. over 10k for the wiki article. It was never "written", it was just copied together from forum responses...i.e. flame wars that would have been pointless otherwise --[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 21:56, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
:::: We may still want to add stuff from recent discussions like this one [http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=23063&p=209595#p209532] {{unsigned|16:47, 15 May 2014‎|Hooray}}
:::: We may still want to add stuff from recent discussions like this one {{forum link|p=209532}} {{unsigned|16:47, 15 May 2014‎|Hooray}}
:: * <s>[[Forum communication]]</s>
:: * <s>[[Forum communication]]</s>
:: * <s>[[Howto:Understand the FlightGear development process]]</s>
:: * <s>[[Howto:Understand the FlightGear development process]]</s>

Navigation menu