DemoMountain

   2060   4   1
User Avatar
Member
221 posts
Joined: July 2005
Offline
Has anyone run the DemoMountain procedural VRAY sample from the HDK? If so, have you been able to get anything more than just a single triangle?

Dave
User Avatar
Member
221 posts
Joined: July 2005
Offline
I found that if I crank the shading quality of my object up to 100, it will divide it 3 times (giving me 21 triangles).

So this leads to my next question:
What does the number that is returned by:
fpreal VRAY_Procedural::getLevelOfDetail ( const UT_BoundingBox & box )
mean? The note in the example says it is the square root of the number of pixels that the bbox covers, and the note in the header says it's the number of pixels covered by the box. But my triangle covers almost the whole frame and when I have the shading quality set at 1, I get a small number (around .1 or .3) If I set the shading quality up to 100, I get numbers in the 5-20 range.

What am I not understanding in the “pixels covered by the bounding box”?
User Avatar
Member
599 posts
Joined: May 2011
Offline
davedjohnson
I found that if I crank the shading quality of my object up to 100, it will divide it 3 times (giving me 21 triangles).

So this leads to my next question:
What does the number that is returned by:
fpreal VRAY_Procedural::getLevelOfDetail ( const UT_BoundingBox & box )
mean? The note in the example says it is the square root of the number of pixels that the bbox covers, and the note in the header says it's the number of pixels covered by the box. But my triangle covers almost the whole frame and when I have the shading quality set at 1, I get a small number (around .1 or .3) If I set the shading quality up to 100, I get numbers in the 5-20 range.

What am I not understanding in the “pixels covered by the bounding box”?

It's a value that's dependent on: Shading Quality, Shading Factor, and the square root of the projected area of the bounding box, using the object's measure.

However, there seems to be a bug in how it's computed, resulting in the global shading factor applied always being 0.001, instead of the user-defined value or the default of 1.

This will be fixed in tomorrow's build.
Halfdan Ingvarsson
Senior Developer
Side Effects Software Inc
User Avatar
Member
221 posts
Joined: July 2005
Offline
Thanks! That will make much more sense.
User Avatar
Member
221 posts
Joined: July 2005
Offline
Thanks for the update. It works great!
  • Quick Links