[Eldorado.Railroad]

captain_bazza, on 04 October 2012 - 06:42 PM, said:

I didn't know bump maps worked in OR !?

Well, sorry to say, they aren't! One day, with another file model, maybe bump maps will be in the cards, but I doubt that is possible with an MSTS shapefile without killing MSTS Bin.

If you would like to try this effect, it is quite simple. (Well Almost!)

1) On a purely artistic sense, select the parts of your model you would like to have "bumps" with.

2) For each of those selected parts, place an exact copy in the same exact location, and scale it slightly larger. This is the tricky part because OR renders things differently than MSTS. So you will have to experiment with it.

3) Now for each part that you scaled up, change its properties so that it is translucent. Also make sure that the material is either loshine or hishine.

4) Create a copy of the texture that was used for the original non scaled parts and with that copy create an 8 bit alpha layer.

5) It now important to think about what you just did in 4)! Essentially you want what is below that bump layer to "peek through". You may you use pure black, or shades of gray, and if your paint program allows it, add a little noise.

When you have exported your model you will see a sheen, dependent on what is in the texture and its alpha layer (windows come to mind). It also gives a 3D effect to things like hatches, doors, without having to create extra polygons to define each of those.

Of course, yes it increases the size (more polygons) of your original model, but it is nothing that OR can't handle size wise. It is not as nice as having real bump maps, but it is the best that you can do for now, and you can have it now! The key is to select only large parts of your model, the smaller parts may be too subtle to notice. Though it is not always the case, small parts can be intricate, that is, they can have a lot of polygons, and we don't want to double the size of the model by bump mapping everything!

have fun,
Eldorado

[captain_bazza]

Thanks for the advice, Eldorado.

I suspect we are entering a phase where there will be problems occuring with our models, but they, like everything in the project, is an experiment to find what will work and work work well.

Ordering of the alphas is moot, it's alway been difficult to get it right. It does work in OR if you do get the order, in the correct sequence.

Try calling the outer alpha AlphNorm4 (there is no 'a' in the Alph(a) - beware, it's so easy to add the 'a' by mistake, check and double-check).

The default doc regarding textures was wrong about the ordering setup.

Cheers Bazza

[B & O GUY]

Quote

If that were the case, then the existence of PolyMaster, to sort amongst other things, blended primitives, would not be required. PolyMaster is required to sort the blended primitives in a shape file created by Train Sim Modeler so that they display correctly/and repeatedly in MSTS. There is no reason to suggest that it would be otherwise for Open Rails. If I am wrong, please explain, exactly how a model exported for Open Rails should have its blended primitives exported so that things like opaque glass do not occur? I cannot "buy" the idea of random drawing order, never being random at all for a given release, and having that change suddenly for the next release.

Eldorado

I use Train Sim Modeler and have been exporting models directly to a shape file without using PolyMaster and everything displays okay. Windows display properly as well as the FA objects behind them. The only reason I do use PolyMaster is for creating sub objects for better frame rates. But it is not absolutely necessary to use it for proper display of objects.

There are several steam locomotive models here in the Beta Test Section that have not had the PolyMaster treatment and still get good frame rates and have proper display of objects.

Allen

[Eldorado.Railroad]

B & O GUY, on 05 October 2012 - 04:30 PM, said:

Eldorado

I use Train Sim Modeler and have been exporting models directly to a shape file without using PolyMaster and everything displays okay. Windows display properly as well as the FA objects behind them. The only reason I do use PolyMaster is for creating sub objects for better frame rates. But it is not absolutely necessary to use it for proper display of objects.

There are several steam locomotive models here in the Beta Test Section that have not had the PolyMaster treatment and still get good frame rates and have proper display of objects.

Allen

I have no reason to doubt what you are saying, great models too! I did work with a payware vendor a few years back and because his models were complex, as in the original post, PolyMaster was the only thing that would sort the alpha blends correctly. Anything else was just a failure. I think that if for the most part the modeler has taken the time to create holes (I mean the actual mesh here!) in the model to fit windows in, PolyMaster is not needed. But when you have a model where the hole is created by using a transparent layer and then throw a translucency layer in between, as in a cab, PolyMaster is needed to sort out the translucency layer into subobjects. That is something that Train Sim Modeler does not do.

As for myself I have been using the exporter in 3D Crafter/Canvas and it has the alpha sorting down pat, except something is now broken using those methods in this release 0.8.0 of Open Rails.

Eldorado

[Eldorado.Railroad]

captain_bazza, on 05 October 2012 - 04:22 PM, said:

Thanks for the advice, Eldorado.

I suspect we are entering a phase where there will be problems occuring with our models, but they, like everything in the project, is an experiment to find what will work and work work well.

Ordering of the alphas is moot, it's alway been difficult to get it right. It does work in OR if you do get the order, in the correct sequence.

Try calling the outer alpha AlphNorm4 (there is no 'a' in the Alph(a) - beware, it's so easy to add the 'a' by mistake, check and double-check).

The default doc regarding textures was wrong about the ordering setup.

Cheers Bazza

Hmmmm...by default I am pretty sure that the exporter from 3D Crafter/Canvas DOES NOT name the primitives in the shapefile that is exported (nor is it required). I guess I could manually edit those entries in the shapefile to see what happens. I would do this if there was some clear signal from the OR developers that they are indeed using this method when the shapefile is read in.

These changes in how things are displayed are discouraging in terms of the effort required to get the effect you want in the first place. If a lot of time is spent experimenting and finding out what OR can display and a solution is arrived at only to have it not work in the next version, what is the point of trying new things?

So yes, doing things in a vanilla(safe) way still work, like a solid model with a single alpha for windows etc. But sandwiched layers are now broken, at least for what I tried. I will check a few sandwiched payware models in the near future to see if they are being displayed correctly. I have noticed that over 4-5 releases of Open Rails the alpha parts are displayed differently from one release to the next, and indeed some bugs were fixed.

thanks for your support,

Eldorado

[captain_bazza]

Oops, sorry AlphNorm refers to the texture not the shape part.

Cheers Bazza

[B & O GUY]

Quote

I have no reason to doubt what you are saying, great models too! I did work with a payware vendor a few years back and because his models were complex, as in the original post, PolyMaster was the only thing that would sort the alpha blends correctly. Anything else was just a failure. I think that if for the most part the modeler has taken the time to create holes (I mean the actual mesh here!) in the model to fit windows in, PolyMaster is not needed. But when you have a model where the hole is created by using a transparent layer and then throw a translucency layer in between, as in a cab, PolyMaster is needed to sort out the translucency layer into subobjects. That is something that Train Sim Modeler does not do.

Eldorado

Actually what PolyMaster is used for with TSM transparencies is to get objects outside the model to display correctly. As in looking in a right side window out through the left side window and be able to see the scenery on the other side such as trees, buildings and signal posts or whatever. Or through the front window and out the back window and be able to see the car behind the locomotive.

I struggled with this problem for years. I originally found PolyMaster very difficult to use and very hard to get repeatable results with. Now it's a piece of cake. Err! Well. Most of the time anyway. Except when it throws up those warnings in German. :sign_thanks:

Quote

Oops, sorry AlphNorm refers to the texture not the shape part.

Capt.

Alphanorm is a shape part material. I usually make a single poly part named AlphaMain and the material would be Alphanorm. And I parent all the other alpha parts to this object. Outer windows would have the material Alphanorm+ and all inner windows Alphanorm-. Any other alpha parts such as chains or headlight lenses would use the Alphanorm+ designation.

Allen

[Eldorado.Railroad]

This is finally being addressed here. I hope this fix does not have to be withdrawn.

Thanks for taking this seriously and giving my hard work back to me,

Eldorado

[captain_bazza]

Ummm, according to the MSTS default docs, the actual material name is AlphNorm(x), but it is so easy to type AlphaNorm by mistake, I do that 50% of the time but usually pick up the typo straight away.

Cheers Bazza