Interesting! Any chance you could switch in an actual ortho projection to compare?
I will try to render both on 3DS max to see the difference
Perspective rendering 3D Studio Max 10
Orthodromic rendering 3D Studio Max 10
Perspective rendering 3DzzD
No real difference : only a little scale between perspective & Orthodromic but that becasue I was not able to easily set exact same zoom for orthodromic rendering & perspective rendering on max
EDIT:
[quote]How much error are we talking about? Because I’m looking at the Processing texture example and there’s some warpage of the texture in a perspective view, so I guess they’re not doing perspective correct mapping, but what’s the error like the other way?
[/quote]
yes this is a faked texture mapping, you can easily see error already but it will be even more noticable if you try to render a grid
- Whatever way they have to contact you, make sure that they simply get an automated reply that says “install xvfb”.
- Ignore these people.
- Catch the exception and rethrow it saying “install xvfb”.
- Ignore these people.
I am being serious btw.
Cas 
hey i’ve got 2 questions: is it possible to bypass the scene graph in 3dzzd?(i don’t like scenegraphs. i just prefer to use opengl immediate mode or vertex arrays), or is it possible to use vertex arrays in processing 3d.
@orangyTang I think irrlicht has a software renderer. there might be a way to just use it by itself.
What is wrong with scenegraphs? OpenGL immediate mode is slow and has been removed from OpenGL ES. When used correctly, scenegraphs allow to get better performance than a naive use of vertex arrays.
Scenegraphs are a really poor design model for games. The list a reasons is pretty long and covered in literature.
I typically don’t use a scenegraph because I can more specifically optimize the rendering path to match my game without one. And when there are a lot of entities popping in and out managing this in a scenegraph gets annoying.
I disagree, on the principle that there are many many different types of scenegraph and that nearly all modern games use one. Eg. Unreal Engine, idtech5, Quake, etc. They are all scenegraphs. They are just nothing like Java3D, which is probably what gives you sweaty nightmares at night.
Even Revenge of the Titans uses a scenegraph.
Cas
A scenegraph is a specific type of data structure. None of the game mentioned use a scenegraph.
personally i think that anything that holds anything other than the raw data that’s getting rendered should be in the physics engine if anywhere else.
how would i use processing 3d by itself? and how do i do shadows in it?
I don’t have a physics engine…
Cas
From that article.
Which is really what I was saying. I meant that I would rather not be confined to using someone else’s scenegraph, and make my own that fits my game.
But, there is also a lot to be said to sticking to an established system to improve portability and readability. And it’s not like I’m really making something that requires amazing efficiency.
OK: I read the wikipedia article. (NOTE: Split this topic off into a new thread) I’m sticking to my guns. None of the listed titles use scenegraphs. I never touched Java3D…my “experience” was with SGI Performer. Just thinking about it is bringing back my facial twitch.
@deepthought: IHMO, the physics engine should know about as little as needed. Unless, of course, we’re redefining what is meant by a “physics engine”.
Good call on the thread split; it’s quite an interesting topic in its own right.
Cas
Trying to resurrect this after the scenegraph derailment - I’m looking into this again, and I need 3Dzzd or JPCT equivalents to gluProject and gluUnproject. Does anyone know the best way of doing this? I couldn’t see a direct equivalent in either API.
JPCT has the Interact2D class which allows world/screen conversion - is that what you’re after?