Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Incorrect decoding of draco model with high quantization bit number #7471

Closed
OmarShehata opened this issue Jan 7, 2019 · 10 comments
Closed

Comments

@OmarShehata
Copy link
Contributor

This was reported by Chris Wang on the forum.

The glTF file attached in this post was encoded with the following Draco parameters:

sOpt.pos_quantization_bits = 20;
sOpt.tex_coords_quantization_bits = 15;

And renders incorrectly in Cesium. Here's what it looks like in Bablyon:

babylon

And in CesiumJS:

cesium

@lilleyse believes this might be because the quantization is hardcoded in a few places in our Draco decoding.

@lilleyse
Copy link
Contributor

lilleyse commented Jan 7, 2019

@lilleyse believes this might be because the quantization is hardcoded in a few places in our Draco decoding.

Specifically I wouldn't be surprised if UNSIGNED_SHORT is hardcoded somewhere.

@wangzhongliang
Copy link

@lilleyse Hi Sean, will this be fixed soon? if not, can you tell me where is possibly hardcoded, so that I can fix myself.

@wangzhongliang
Copy link

When I set dequantizeInShader to false, the model is not distorted, and displays well.
Hope it will help.

@lilleyse
Copy link
Contributor

This also came up in CesiumGS/gltf-pipeline#511

@lilleyse
Copy link
Contributor

Opened an issue in the Draco repo about whether it's possible to query the quantization bits without decoding to quantized form: google/draco#573

@sanjeetsuhag and I talked offline - if there's no way to do it in the API, we'll need to dequantize in our own code.

@sanjeetsuhag sanjeetsuhag self-assigned this Jan 27, 2020
@Ben-Mack
Copy link

@lilleyse Has this bug been fixed on the latest Cesium?

@lilleyse
Copy link
Contributor

@Ben-Mack, no, still an open issue

@lilleyse
Copy link
Contributor

lilleyse commented Jul 6, 2022

Came up again in #10516

@lilleyse
Copy link
Contributor

lilleyse commented Jan 2, 2023

Came up again in #10977

@lilleyse
Copy link
Contributor

lilleyse commented Jan 2, 2023

Fixed in #10979

@lilleyse lilleyse closed this as completed Jan 2, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants