[sldev] Re: [VWR] [PATCH] particles VWR-418 VWR-983 VWR-2164
(Tofu Linden)
Nicholaz Beresford
nicholaz at blueflash.cc
Mon Sep 17 09:59:17 PDT 2007
I had one effect today (didn't look into the code yet). A guy was
standing in the sandbox on the Hippo sim, I was up there on my
mountain. He was modifying an object and the pixies were flowing
from his hand to the object. Zooming camera closer/further turned
the pixies off before they were invisible by distance. Visually
it was a whitish line a few pixels which then disappeard from one
moment to the next, so culling may be a bit too agressive there.
Nick
Second Life from the inside out:
http://nicholaz-beresford.blogspot.com/
Dirk Moerenhout wrote:
>> I didn't catch this before, or parsed it as "particles that are too
>> small to be seen".
>
> More specifically it's "Particles that are so small they are not seen
> unless they are within 25cm of the camera position". I assume nobody
> is using those for smoke as it would require you to generate your
> smoke very close to the camera in order for it to be sized 1 pixel. As
> such for it to look even remotely like smoke you need a few thousand
> within 25cm of the camera which in turn would mean it's abusing the
> particle system.
>
> You could hence extend this limit beyond 25cm without harm but 25cm
> was enough to catch the bulk of the buggy scripts so that's why I
> opted for 25.
>
> Still I'm willing to look at any script one can come up with.
>
>>>> VWR-983:
>>>> This focuses on particle updates. This should fix the issues where
>>>> particles go out of sync and end up where they should not be
>>>> according
>>>> to timing. This is done by keeping accurate timing for particles that
>>>> are invisible (and hence get updated only every 8 grames). And a bug
>>>> is fixed that caused particles not to be updated every time another
>>>> particle was moved to another group or deleted.
>> Does this fix the "flashing" bug where particles that have follow-
>> source set are generated as if they didn't have follow-source set
>> then *snap* to the source the first time they're updated? That one is
>> really frustrating.
>
> It might but I don't recall having a specific test object for this.
> Can you provide one? If it's not fixed I'll check what is causing it
> and fix it.
>
> Dirk aka Blakar Ogre
> _______________________________________________
> Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription:
> /index.html
More information about the SLDev
mailing list