Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
On Thursday 06 January 2005 09:26, Matthew Law wrote: > Hello again, > although my free time has been in short supply recently, I've > been plodding on with some Blender models. I've noticed a lot > of the tutorials available for blender use sub-surf techniques > to get smooth results on curvy forms like cars and aircraft. > Can this be used for FGFS models which will be exported to > AC3D or is the sub-surf lost? - as I understand it the > sub-surface algorithms are just a type of mesh smoothing > operation. Or am I way off the mark here? > > > > All the best, > > Matthew. I've not heard of sub-surfaces but it sounds rather close to subdivision surfaces, often abbreviated to SDS. If so, and although it's specific to the software I use (Realsoft3D), you could have a look at the Subdivision Surfaces section from the manual at http://www.phnet.fi/public/realsoft/subdivision/intro.html The tutorial style and screen grabs explain it pretty well. LeeE ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
Quoting Roy Vegard Ovesen : > On Thursday 06 January 2005 15:36, Matthew Law wrote: > > I googled around on the subject and I believe that the sub-surface version > > of the model is only a kind of visual thing done inside blender. The > > objects within the model itself remain in their lower poly form through > > out. > > I also thought that Bleder did the sub-surfacing in real-time. > > > I've just thought that I might be able to get a really nice smooth but > > higher poly model by using nurbs surfaces to model half of the fuselage, > > say. Then I'll convert it to a mesh and duplicate, mirror and join it > > to make the whole thing. Does this sound reasonable? > > I just done what you describe here. One advantage of using nurbs surfaces is > that you can set the resolution. So if you need a low poly model you just > reset the resolution of you nurbs surface and reconvert it to a mesh. It's a > good idea to keep your original nurbs surface and convert a duplicate of it. Beware, the .ac exporter is only able to work on meshes, not on curves or surfaces. At one time you would have to convert them to meshes, and you will need to do backup copy because you can't convert mesh to surfaces. It is a one way process. -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
* David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-01-06 15:00]: > I experimented with stuff like that early on, but in the end, I found > the most success just building my meshes by hand. For the fuselage, I > usually start with a mesh square in front view, then I split edges and > move vertices until I have a cross-section of the widest part; next, I > switch to side view and duplicate that square forward and backward, > adjusting its height to fit the fuselage side profile; then I go back > to front view and adjust the shapes of the cross-sections (also from > top view, usually), then I connect them all up. A similar approach > works for the wings and horizonatal stabilizer or stabilator. Thanks, I'll give both techniques a try and see which one works out best for me. All the best, Matthew. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
On Thursday 06 January 2005 15:36, Matthew Law wrote: > I googled around on the subject and I believe that the sub-surface version > of the model is only a kind of visual thing done inside blender. The > objects within the model itself remain in their lower poly form through > out. I also thought that Bleder did the sub-surfacing in real-time. > I've just thought that I might be able to get a really nice smooth but > higher poly model by using nurbs surfaces to model half of the fuselage, > say. Then I'll convert it to a mesh and duplicate, mirror and join it > to make the whole thing. Does this sound reasonable? I just done what you describe here. One advantage of using nurbs surfaces is that you can set the resolution. So if you need a low poly model you just reset the resolution of you nurbs surface and reconvert it to a mesh. It's a good idea to keep your original nurbs surface and convert a duplicate of it. -- Roy Vegard Ovesen ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 14:36:57 +, Matthew Law <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've just thought that I might be able to get a really nice smooth but > higher poly model by using nurbs surfaces to model half of the fuselage, > say. Then I'll convert it to a mesh and duplicate, mirror and join it > to make the whole thing. Does this sound reasonable? I experimented with stuff like that early on, but in the end, I found the most success just building my meshes by hand. For the fuselage, I usually start with a mesh square in front view, then I split edges and move vertices until I have a cross-section of the widest part; next, I switch to side view and duplicate that square forward and backward, adjusting its height to fit the fuselage side profile; then I go back to front view and adjust the shapes of the cross-sections (also from top view, usually), then I connect them all up. A similar approach works for the wings and horizonatal stabilizer or stabilator. All the best, David -- http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
I googled around on the subject and I believe that the sub-surface version of the model is only a kind of visual thing done inside blender. The objects within the model itself remain in their lower poly form through out. I've just thought that I might be able to get a really nice smooth but higher poly model by using nurbs surfaces to model half of the fuselage, say. Then I'll convert it to a mesh and duplicate, mirror and join it to make the whole thing. Does this sound reasonable? All the best, Matthew. * David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-01-06 14:10]: > On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 09:26:58 +, Matthew Law <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hello again, > > although my free time has been in short supply recently, I've been > > plodding on with some Blender models. I've noticed a lot of the > > tutorials available for blender use sub-surf techniques to get smooth > > results on curvy forms like cars and aircraft. Can this be used for > > FGFS models which will be exported to AC3D or is the sub-surf lost? - as > > I understand it the sub-surface algorithms are just a type of mesh > > smoothing operation. Or am I way off the mark here? > > I don't know, to tell the truth, but all that goes out to AC3D format > (and all that plib can use) is polygons, colours, and textures (one > texture per object). > > > All the best, > > > David > > -- > http://www.megginson.com/ > > ___ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org > http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel > 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d > ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 09:26:58 +, Matthew Law <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello again, > although my free time has been in short supply recently, I've been > plodding on with some Blender models. I've noticed a lot of the > tutorials available for blender use sub-surf techniques to get smooth > results on curvy forms like cars and aircraft. Can this be used for > FGFS models which will be exported to AC3D or is the sub-surf lost? - as > I understand it the sub-surface algorithms are just a type of mesh > smoothing operation. Or am I way off the mark here? I don't know, to tell the truth, but all that goes out to AC3D format (and all that plib can use) is polygons, colours, and textures (one texture per object). All the best, David -- http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
Hello again, although my free time has been in short supply recently, I've been plodding on with some Blender models. I've noticed a lot of the tutorials available for blender use sub-surf techniques to get smooth results on curvy forms like cars and aircraft. Can this be used for FGFS models which will be exported to AC3D or is the sub-surf lost? - as I understand it the sub-surface algorithms are just a type of mesh smoothing operation. Or am I way off the mark here? All the best, Matthew. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
