<html>
At 09:17 13/07/00 -0400, Lisa Sobierajski Avila a écrit:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite><blockquote type=cite cite>Nope, I've tested
that already, replacing the new code with the old (rectangle). No
differences, bug remains.</blockquote><br>
So if you simply alter the vertices (by using size instead of size-1)
everything works fine?</blockquote><br>
That's right.<br>
<br>
But if you look at the portion of code :<br>
<br>
t[i*8 + 0] = (float)((size[0]*(xTile ))
)/(float)textureSize[0] + offset[0];<br>
t[i*8 + 1] = (float)((size[2]*(yTile ))
)/(float)textureSize[1] + offset[1];<br>
t[i*8 + 2] = (float)((size[0]*(xTile ))
)/(float)textureSize[0] + offset[0];<br>
t[i*8 + 3] =
(float)((size[2]*(yTile+1))-1)/(float)textureSize[1] - offset[1];<br>
t[i*8 + 4] =
(float)((size[0]*(xTile+1))-1)/(float)textureSize[0] - offset[0];<br>
t[i*8 + 5] =
(float)((size[2]*(yTile+1))-1)/(float)textureSize[1] - offset[1];<br>
t[i*8 + 6] =
(float)((size[0]*(xTile+1))-1)/(float)textureSize[0] - offset[0];<br>
t[i*8 + 7] = (float)((size[2]*(yTile ))
)/(float)textureSize[1] + offset[1];<br>
<br>
v[i*12 + 0] = origin[0];<br>
v[i*12 + 2] = origin[2];<br>
<br>
v[i*12 + 3] = origin[0];<br>
v[i*12 + 5] = spacing[2] * (float)(size[2]) +
origin[2];<br>
<br>
v[i*12 + 6] = spacing[0] * (float)(size[0]) +
origin[0];<br>
v[i*12 + 8] = spacing[2] * (float)(size[2]) +
origin[2];<br>
<br>
v[i*12 + 9] = spacing[0] * (float)(size[0]) +
origin[0];<br>
v[i*12 + 11] = origin[2];<br>
<br>
I've just removed the -1 in the low part of the code (float(size[x]), not
in the (*Tile+1))-1 above (the change you made initally concerned both
-1). I've just tested right now that if you remove the -1 in that place
also, it works fine too :( Which convinces me that I should better stop
hacking this without understanding it perfectly, but I'm lacking time
this week :)<br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>That change can be made (I'd prefer to wait
until after finding the current bug!) </blockquote><br>
Right :)<br>
<br>
<font size=2><blockquote type=cite cite><blockquote type=cite cite>BTW2 :
I've sent a mail to the VolumePro guys. Jesus it's expensive ! $
5500 ! (25% discount for university, but wow). Is it really worth it ? We
are expecting a GeForce here, and I'm quite impatient to see how it deals
with the volumeTextureMapper2D. I'm gonna test it <br>
with Voodoo 3 this week also.</font></blockquote><br>
Is that $5500 US? I thought it was about $3000 US if you got it without
any special add-ons. </blockquote><br>
The board is $3000 US, but the SDK is $2500, which is bad joke :( What
can I do without the SDK ? I need the SDK to compile the VolumePro
support in VTK, am I right ?<br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>Whether or not it is worth it depends on your
data size, your application area and your interactivity requirements. We
do get about 10-30 frames per second, and the quality is generally better
than texture mapping (although not as good as ray casting). When we are
working with small data sets (64^3 or 128^3) it is not that important
since the texture map version is usually rendering about 5-10 frames or
so per second with either the full volume or a half res version, and it
fills in pretty quickly once you stop interacting.</blockquote><br>
That's right, that's actually what I'm doing to visualize 256x256x100 :
resampling it to 0.3333 in each direction or so, and use that resampled
stack during interaction. BTW, I guess there might be some twicking to
do, because when the full-rez is displayed, it is not exactly at the same
place as the low-res, it looks shifted/rotated. I guess it has something
to do with resampling, I will have to shift it manually by 0.5 or 0.333
voxel, andhave a look at how the ImageResampler works.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite cite>We have two VolumePro boards here, and I feel
that I can get things done quicker with it (for example, simply loading
some data in, setting the properties, and generating an
image).</blockquote><br>
And what about these SGI hardware 3D board (Oxygen ? Osiris ?). Well, I
know it's expensive :)<br>
I might send an email to the public list to check if anyone has been
using another hardware volume rendering solution. have you heard
about anything else ?</html>