Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Huge sphere

This topic is 5673 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I''m an OpenGL newbie, so this question may be easy, but I made the following sphere: gluSphere(quadratic,1.0f,30000000,30000000); Note the detail. I thought this was going to run at 0.00000000000001 FPS, if this amount of polygons could be loaded into the RAM already, but I run it and it went superfast? How''s that possible, does OpenGL reduce the number of polys automaticly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I set it to 3 --> gluSphere(quadratic,1.0f,3,3);
then it looks like a very polygonal shape that is hardly a sphere.
If I change it to 20, it''s a sphere but I can clearly recognise the sides.
If I change it to 64, I can still see the polygons if I look good.
At 256, the polygons are still visible, but not for the human eye. I know they''re there, because if I make the sphere white and rotate it, I can see some pixels changing.
At 3000000000, it''s the smoothest sphere you can dream of, you can''t even see it''s rotating if there''s no texture on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lode, things get capped to prevent insane requests like yours from crushing the cpu/ram/etc.

you have to make compromises. look into per pixel lighting and such. is this sphere going to be untextured using flat shading? consider bezier patches (not supported by most cards, heck even some cards are broken in regards to them) to approximate the speherical shape you are after. maybe you should try writing a realtime ray tracer, you would have more luck.

[edited by - a person on June 4, 2002 2:48:07 PM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by a person
consider bezier patches (not supported by most cards, heck even some cards are broken in regards to them


So? How does that stop you from implimenting your own evaluator?



Death of one is a tragedy, death of a million is just a statistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites