hi,

"Bald Eagle" <cre### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
> =?UTF-8?Q?J=c3=b6rg_=22Yadgar=22_Bleimann?= <yaz### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> ...
> You don't need 40 billion triangles where a few thousand, or a cleverly textured
> primitive with normals will suffice.  I completely understand your goal - but at
> the present, you will let the idea of the perfect sacrifice the reality of the
> good.

agree with this.  ~70% of the surface is ocean, so a lo-res representation of
that alone would lead to significant savings.

and the "Level Of Detail" point too is good.  how many people would want to zoom
in closely on deserts, or uninhabited areas in general?


regards, jr.

Post a reply to this message