Feature Requests item #1833404, was opened at 2007-11-16 17:06
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=835080&aid=1833404&group_id=165310
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: Rendering
Group: v 0.3.0
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Geoff Hutchison (ghutchis)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: Depth Cues
Initial Comment:
We should add “fog” for optional depth cues.
This is independent of GLSL use like QuteMol, which would provide much better shading. But for the general OpenGL painter, it would be great to have some depth cues.
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=835080&aid=1833404&group_id=165310
On Dec 19, 2007, at 8:53 PM, SourceForge.net wrote:
We should add “fog” for optional depth cues.
…
Comment By: Marcus D. Hanwell (cryosuk)
I have been testing this locally and it is looking reasonable. I
just need
to get a decent dialog for it. Should this be a popup from the View
menu or
a global in the preferences dialog?
I think we should have general view options in the View menu. So depth
cues like fog, XYZ axes, etc. should go on the View menu IMHO. This is
where I’d go to look. Maybe we need to separate general application
preferences and view preferences?
For example, on the Mac, most application preferences have tabs for
display, general application behavior, etc.
Cheers,
-Geoff
Just one small remark for whomever will implement depth cues:
You will need “fog start” and “fog end” distances to pass to opengl. These
should be computed much as the “near” and “far” distances in
Camera::applyPerspective(). I would suggest looking at the body of this
function.
Cheers,
Benoit
On Thursday 20 December 2007 04:24:37 Geoffrey Hutchison wrote:
On Dec 19, 2007, at 8:53 PM, SourceForge.net wrote:
We should add “fog” for optional depth cues.
…
Comment By: Marcus D. Hanwell (cryosuk)
I have been testing this locally and it is looking reasonable. I
just need
to get a decent dialog for it. Should this be a popup from the View
menu or
a global in the preferences dialog?
I think we should have general view options in the View menu. So depth
cues like fog, XYZ axes, etc. should go on the View menu IMHO. This is
where I’d go to look. Maybe we need to separate general application
preferences and view preferences?
For example, on the Mac, most application preferences have tabs for
display, general application behavior, etc.
Cheers,
-Geoff
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It’s the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplac
e _______________________________________________
Avogadro-devel mailing list
Avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
avogadro-devel List Signup and Options
Benoît Jacob wrote:
Just one small remark for whomever will implement depth cues:
You will need “fog start” and “fog end” distances to pass to opengl. These
should be computed much as the “near” and “far” distances in
Camera::applyPerspective(). I would suggest looking at the body of this
function.
I am already there 
I think this should also be something the user
can adjust, i.e. in some figures you want to show the closest part of
the molecule whilst hardly being able to see the further parts for added
emphasis. In other figures you just want quite a subtle fading for the
most distant parts of the molecule.
I was thinking of using the molecule parameters such as molecule radius,
farthest etc…
Cheers,
Benoit
On Thursday 20 December 2007 04:24:37 Geoffrey Hutchison wrote:
On Dec 19, 2007, at 8:53 PM, SourceForge.net wrote:
We should add “fog” for optional depth cues.
…
Comment By: Marcus D. Hanwell (cryosuk)
I have been testing this locally and it is looking reasonable. I
just need
to get a decent dialog for it. Should this be a popup from the View
menu or
a global in the preferences dialog?
I think we should have general view options in the View menu. So depth
cues like fog, XYZ axes, etc. should go on the View menu IMHO. This is
where I’d go to look. Maybe we need to separate general application
preferences and view preferences?
For example, on the Mac, most application preferences have tabs for
display, general application behavior, etc.
Cheers,
-Geoff
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It’s the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplac
e _______________________________________________
Avogadro-devel mailing list
Avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
avogadro-devel List Signup and Options
Avogadro-devel mailing list
Avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
avogadro-devel List Signup and Options
Geoffrey Hutchison wrote:
On Dec 19, 2007, at 8:53 PM, SourceForge.net wrote:
We should add “fog” for optional depth cues.
…
Comment By: Marcus D. Hanwell (cryosuk)
I have been testing this locally and it is looking reasonable. I
just need
to get a decent dialog for it. Should this be a popup from the View
menu or
a global in the preferences dialog?
I think we should have general view options in the View menu. So depth
cues like fog, XYZ axes, etc. should go on the View menu IMHO. This is
where I’d go to look. Maybe we need to separate general application
preferences and view preferences?
For example, on the Mac, most application preferences have tabs for
display, general application behavior, etc.
Pressed the wrong button and replied just to Geoff by accident… What I
wanted to clarify is how we want to handle our different options. We
only really have one application setting (tabbed widgets) and the rest
as I see them are view options.
Some are check boxes - should they just be entries in the view menu?
Others need more configuration options such as quality and possibly fog
- should they be individual menu items that open a dialog? Or should we
just have a view options entry that opens a dialog? I could see using a
combination so axes might be a menu entry whereas quality, fog, debug
etc are in an View->Options dialog.
It would be good to hear what other people think.
I think things like Axis / FPS / Fog is handled very well as a checkbox
in the menu rather than in the settings dialog. Settings dialog should
be things that don’t change often. Also, Fog / Axis / FPS is on a
View-by-View basis so if anything it should be in a “View Properties”
dialog. We can always change simple things like this.
That’s my two-cents.
(Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 09:22:57AM -0500) “Marcus D. Hanwell” mhanwell@gmail.com:
Geoffrey Hutchison wrote:
On Dec 19, 2007, at 8:53 PM, SourceForge.net wrote:
We should add “fog” for optional depth cues.
…
Comment By: Marcus D. Hanwell (cryosuk)
I have been testing this locally and it is looking reasonable. I
just need
to get a decent dialog for it. Should this be a popup from the View
menu or
a global in the preferences dialog?
I think we should have general view options in the View menu. So depth
cues like fog, XYZ axes, etc. should go on the View menu IMHO. This is
where I’d go to look. Maybe we need to separate general application
preferences and view preferences?
For example, on the Mac, most application preferences have tabs for
display, general application behavior, etc.
Pressed the wrong button and replied just to Geoff by accident… What I
wanted to clarify is how we want to handle our different options. We
only really have one application setting (tabbed widgets) and the rest
as I see them are view options.
Some are check boxes - should they just be entries in the view menu?
Others need more configuration options such as quality and possibly fog
- should they be individual menu items that open a dialog? Or should we
just have a view options entry that opens a dialog? I could see using a
combination so axes might be a menu entry whereas quality, fog, debug
etc are in an View->Options dialog.
It would be good to hear what other people think.
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
Avogadro-devel mailing list
Avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
avogadro-devel List Signup and Options
On Dec 20, 2007, at 2:14 PM, Donald Ephraim Curtis wrote:
be things that don’t change often. Also, Fog / Axis / FPS is on a
View-by-View basis so if anything it should be in a “View Properties”
dialog. We can always change simple things like this.
It sounds like we have a clear consensus – that there should be some
menu items (actions) which control things like the axis display. I
think we can also include them in a “View Settings” dialog on the View
menu. There’s nothing which says they need to appear in only one place.
Of course if we have this, the main window is going to need to receive
a signal any time the view changes. I might have the axes displayed in
one view, but not another.
General application settings (like the tabbed tools) should appear in
the general Settings dialog. Of course we may want to add some more
application settings or it’s going to be a bit strange to have one
dialog with only one checkbox! 
Cheers,
-Geoff