[sldev] Re: Questions on the particle system

[Argent Stonecutter]

On 02-Dec-2007, at 22:02, Dale Glass wrote:

> On Monday 03 December 2007 04:12:46 Argent Stonecutter wrote:
>> On 02-Dec-2007, at 15:53, Dale Glass wrote:
>>> If I'm looking at something that's near, like say, a candle, I want
>>> to see
>>> the candle in its all full detail glory. Whatever is going on far
>>> away is
>>> far less interesting.
>>

>> If you can see details in the flame then the AREA it covers is large,
>> so it's not a small particle system.
>

> I still think the area is the wrong approach. Things with large  
> areas are
> usually uninteresting and don't lose that much from being toned down a
> bit.

Most any particle system with a lot of particles in it doesn't lose  
much from being toned down a bit.

My "Stunt Double", however, only has 30 particles in it (one particle  
per second, 30 second lifespan).

> http://daleglass.net/images/screenshots/overkill.jpg

That effect is at zero distance from the camera: you're inside it.

> Besides, in the current codebase this is going to be counted even  
> if it's
> happening somewhere out of your view.

Which it should.

> In fact I think that prioritizing *small* effects near the camera  
> could be
> better.


Don't forget that the dimensions of an effect fall off at the square  
of the distance. A flame system 1 meter from the camera that's 10cm  
across and 1m tall subtends the same area on your screen as a  
snowstorm 100 meters from the camera that's 30 meters by 30 meters.  
They would both get the same priority.