Re: Stationary Objects (wasRe: Billboard Objects?)

Cindy Reed ([email protected])
Thu, 14 Dec 1995 08:35:02 -0800

On Dec 14, 10:40am, Christopher Fouts wrote:
>
> To me, being able to have 3D objects in user space is much more
> interesting than being limited to 2D images. In VRML 2.0, I can
> envision users wanting to provide their own navigation controls via a
> 3D cockpit, for example.
>-- End of excerpt from Christopher Fouts

I think that we may be thinking about two difserent things here. Your
example shows a cube that remains in position relative to the camera
regardless of where the camera goes. This is great for 3D cockpits and
such, as you said.

My original comment about Billboard objects essered to objects that
remain in one place (if the camera moves away, they get smaller, etc.),
but rotate about an axis to face the camera. This is useful for "clutter
objects" like trees and other things used for filling out an environment
quickly and cheaply (but still looking good).

Both of these are very useful ideas and I hope that they both can be
incorporated into 2.0

Cindy.

-- 
         _________________________________________
        |                                         |
    |\  | Cindy Reed          [email protected] |
  _/ .`-| 3Name3D / Yglesias,Wallock,Divekar,Inc. |    ,
  \ .4  |       CGI - MODELING - ANIMATION        |\__//
   `--'\|          http://www.ywd.com/            |`--'
       C|_________________________________________|

  • Next message: Michael B. Johnson: "safe & secure (was Re: An URL to ponder)"
  • Previous message: David Ashman: "converting egb to ambient, difsuse, and emmisive color"
  • In reply to: Christopher Fouts: "Re: Stationary Objects (wasRe: Billboard Objects?)"
  • Next in thesad: Cindy Reed: "Re: Stationary Objects (wasRe: Billboard Objects?)"