Angus Dorbie (dorbie++at++bitch.reading.sgi.com)
Fri, 26 Jan 1996 11:19:03 +0100
The simple answer is that the pair of long skinny triangles is better but
there are a couple of issues to bear in mind.
The first is that if youre repeating your texture along the road
and the eye is near the road and your repeat exceeds texture coordinate
15 it's probably worth splitting the road to avoid coordinates as high
as this in your near LODs, I haven't benchmarked this.
The second is that you you don't want to send grossly pixel limited
polygons to the pipeline in a scene if it can be avoided because
you can loose potential geometry performance while they are being shaded.
It's better to split them into moderately pixel limited polygons but only
if you can draw small geometry limited polygons in between, & I expect you
don't want to thrash modes (especially texture) when you do this.
This makes it impractical for most applications but if you were to
try this you'd probably want to split the road longitudinally since
trying to accomplish this transversely would require lots of polygons.
So more even skinnier polygons is probably your best bet but only if
you have other more distant polygons to draw in between them & the value
of this depends on the number of RMs you have. Performer won't help you
with this.
Rgds,
Angus.
On Jan 25, 2:20pm, tidrowd++at++cc.tacom.army.mil wrote:
> Subject: Modeling question
> Question on polygon efficiency:
>
> Which would be more efficient - a pair of long skinny triangle, or a
> mesh of shorter ones (I'm modeling a straight section of road)
>
> Anyone?
>
>
> Don Tidrow
> Visual Simulation Developer
> US Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command
>
>-- End of excerpt from tidrowd++at++cc.tacom.army.mil
-- Angus Dorbie, Silicon Graphics Ltd, UK dorbie++at++reading.sgi.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:52:18 PDT