On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Ricardo Mayor <
ricardo.mayor@...> wrote:
> Yes, both options are equivalent. The main difference is that option B needs
> a Coc calculation and an explicit transformation between screen and camera
> spaces to test bounding box with planes. In option C this transformation and
> the COC calculation are included in the function that defines the clipping
> region. That is the difference
I would have thought that for option B, the only additional thing you
need to do is to compute the max CoC for the bound, transform that CoC
from raster into the camera space (essentially dividing by the image
dimensions), and add it onto the existing bound which is already in
camera space. Then test the result against the frustrum clipping
planes.
The max CoC calculation is really cheap at this level (it's only a
floating point divide + a few multiplications and additions).
Likewise, expanding the camera space bound by that CoC should be
really computationally cheap too... to me they look about the same
computational cost.
~Chris.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA
is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your
developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay
ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf_______________________________________________
Aqsis-development mailing list
Aqsis-development@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/aqsis-development
