Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures
Paul Surgeon wrote: I decided to do a little pixel pushing today. I've created a bush type texture for FlightGear that I used to replace the tundra. (BTW - isn't tundra supposed to be an icy climate?) Screen grabs here : http://surgdom.hollosite.com/flightgear/flightgear.html Do people want textures like this in FlightGear? It looks pretty nice to my eyes ... some of the existing textures are better than others, so if people can come up with even better looking replacements, I'm generally all for it, as long as the new texture is representative of the land cover type. Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures
Paul Surgeon wrote: Screen grabs here : http://surgdom.hollosite.com/flightgear/flightgear.html Do people want textures like this in FlightGear? I like it ! And I think such images would probably be nice to appear within the screenshots section, likewise for the recent 747 livery - it's all about impressing people :-) ...and still it would be good if one could find a compromise to enable people to customize such settings - so that you can choose what kind of textures to use. -- Boris ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures
On Saturday, 30 October 2004 21:33, Curtis L. Olson wrote: It looks pretty nice to my eyes ... some of the existing textures are better than others, so if people can come up with even better looking replacements, I'm generally all for it, as long as the new texture is representative of the land cover type. Curt. Curt, that is one of the things that bugged me a bit. I had a quick look at the the VMAP0 data that is on the TerraGear website and it seems pretty limited when it comes to land cover types. Do you only use VMAP0 data when generating scenery or do you use land cover/use data from other sources too? Having a list of land types to develop textures against would help a lot. Also I noticed that the textures in FlightGear seem to be pretty dark. Is there a design reason for this that I need to take into account? Paul P.S. Getting textures to not repeat is hard work and unfortunately I have to remove any distinguishing features like houses or isolated roads which is a pity. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures
Paul Surgeon wrote: Curt, that is one of the things that bugged me a bit. I had a quick look at the the VMAP0 data that is on the TerraGear website and it seems pretty limited when it comes to land cover types. It is somewhat limited and low res ... Do you only use VMAP0 data when generating scenery or do you use land cover/use data from other sources too? Having a list of land types to develop textures against would help a lot. Right now we are only using vmap0. If you are aware of additional sources or better sources (especially if they have worldwide coverage) then please let me know. Given my time constraints, I can't say I'll immediately jump on every tip, but land cover is one area where our data is somewhat lacking (and very dated.) Also I noticed that the textures in FlightGear seem to be pretty dark. Is there a design reason for this that I need to take into account? Be careful, everyone has slightly different monitor gamma ... these can shade everything lighter or darker, sometimes significantly ... there isn't an easy answer to this since we have no control over the user's gamma settings or naturual monitor gamma. And adjusting for this at the application level is generally a *very* bad thing to do. Paul P.S. Getting textures to not repeat is hard work and unfortunately I have to remove any distinguishing features like houses or isolated roads which is a pity. Life is full of trade offs. :-) Someone from the MSFS dev team posted a paper on tips and hints for making textures tile while reducing visible repeating artifacts ... I have no idea what the link is, but it might be worth a glance if you can dig it up. Regards, Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures
I just noticed that there are already similar textures like savanna, desert, desert1 and wash. The question I now have is why are all the hills East of SFO mapped to tundra?! I've looked at aerial photos of SFO and tundra is definately the wrong type of land cover. The texture I created comes from textures around Concorde which a few clicks West of SFO. Is VMAP0 data that bad? Paul ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures
Paul Surgeon wrote: I just noticed that there are already similar textures like savanna, desert, desert1 and wash. The question I now have is why are all the hills East of SFO mapped to tundra?! I've looked at aerial photos of SFO and tundra is definately the wrong type of land cover. The texture I created comes from textures around Concorde which a few clicks West of SFO. If you look at materials.xml you will see this: material nameGrassCover/name nameBareTundraCover/name nameHerbTundraCover/name nameMixedTundraCover/name textureTerrain/tundra.rgb/texture This means that all material named name are tied to the same texture. You could try to move the appropriate name into it's own section with a reference to your texture file. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures
On Saturday, 30 October 2004 22:55, Curtis L. Olson wrote: Right now we are only using vmap0. What would be helpful is the mappings you use when generating the scenery. I noticed TerraGear is quite flexible when it comes to mapping the data types to the texture types. Do you use a script or do you do it by hand every time? I'm busy documenting the land to texture type mappings at the moment so that we don't end up with a mess. Be careful, everyone has slightly different monitor gamma ... these can shade everything lighter or darker, sometimes significantly ... What I find useful is comparing the FG textures with real photos on my monitor. Not all but most of the FG textures are very dark. I also notice that I have to crank up my brightness to 100% when I run FG as apposed to the normal 50% for all the other software I use. Life is full of trade offs. :-) Someone from the MSFS dev team posted a paper on tips and hints for making textures tile while reducing visible repeating artifacts ... I have no idea what the link is, but it might be worth a glance if you can dig it up. I have that article - very useful info. Thanks Paul P.S. Now all we have to do is implement seasonal textures. :P ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures
On Saturday, 30 October 2004 23:24, Erik Hofman wrote: If you look at materials.xml you will see this: material nameGrassCover/name nameBareTundraCover/name nameHerbTundraCover/name nameMixedTundraCover/name textureTerrain/tundra.rgb/texture This means that all material named name are tied to the same texture. You could try to move the appropriate name into it's own section with a reference to your texture file. That's weird. Why do we map everything to one texture when we already have appropriate textures that we can use? Let me go hash them up a bit. :) Paul ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Textures
Curtis L. Olson writes: Paul Surgeon wrote: Curt, that is one of the things that bugged me a bit. I had a quick look at the the VMAP0 data that is on the TerraGear website and it seems pretty limited when it comes to land cover types. It is somewhat limited and low res ... Do you only use VMAP0 data when generating scenery or do you use land cover/use data from other sources too? Having a list of land types to develop textures against would help a lot. Right now we are only using vmap0. If you are aware of additional sources or better sources (especially if they have worldwide coverage) then please let me know. Given my time constraints, I can't say I'll immediately jump on every tip, but land cover is one area where our data is somewhat lacking (and very dated.) I can't think of a better vextor global data except for vmap1 For the US their is much better data from the USGS for example http://gisdata.usgs.gov/mapservices.asp?CategoryName=Land%20Cover This service has come on line since we designed the Scenery Generation tools http://glcf.umiacs.umd.edu/index.shtml Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures and the Transparency Mask
Innis Cunningham wrote: The size of the model does not seem to effect frame rates in FG.I get nearly the same rate if I use the cessna or the an225.I have tried with the fuselage double sided and single sided the frame rates seem to be the same. There are others though for which this is becoming a problem... Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures and the Transparency Mask
Erik Hofman writes Innis Cunningham wrote: The size of the model does not seem to effect frame rates in FG.I get nearly the same rate if I use the cessna or the an225.I have tried with the fuselage double sided and single sided the frame rates seem to be the same. There are others though for which this is becoming a problem... The thing is is it the total number of vertices/surfaces in the model that determines the frame rate or is it also dependant on if the model is double sided or single sided. I guess what I am asking is if two models have the same amount of vertices /surfaces do they place the same load on the system. Erik Cheers Innis _ Need plastic Surgery? Apply for a Virgin Credit Card. Click here: http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;9466596;9687279;s?http://au.virginmoney.com/virgin/publish.nsf/Content/VM+HomePage?OpenDocumentsource=P08 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures and the Transparency Mask
Innis Cunningham wrote: The thing is is it the total number of vertices/surfaces in the model that determines the frame rate or is it also dependant on if the model is double sided or single sided. Both. Double sided objects count for the fillrate. Using singe sided polygons can speed up rendering for a maximum of 150%. Some cards are limited to the number of vertices that can be rendered per second. I guess what I am asking is if two models have the same amount of vertices /surfaces do they place the same load on the system. That also depends. A small object will be rendered faster than a big object (because of pixel fill rate), but only if they are at an equal distance from the viewer. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Textures and the Transparency Mask
Innis Cunningham wrote Hi All I have run into a bit of a problem using the transparency mask. Firstly I have an engine texure that when the mask is not present the texure is quite smooth but when I add the mask to the texture the side of the engine looks like a series of planks laid side by side(probably a bad explanation).Has anyone else experienced anything like this. No. Secoundly when I look through the transparent Windows I can see some parts of the fuselage interior and some parts not(the fuselage is 2 sided).The other day I was modifying the model and I got most of the interior to show through the widows.But then I moded it again and now only part of the fuselage shows again.It is like the transparency needs to see the parts of the model in a certian order but I have not been able to figure out how to do it. Has anybody got any ideas on this. If I place myself inside the fuselage and look around every thing looks fine.All I can see is the interior of the plane but if I look in through a window then I see the effect described above. Any help greatly appreciated The transparent object must come after the objects you wish to see through it. You can adjust the order in AC3D or by means of an animation in the model file. Have a look at the Hunter data and you will see where the cockpit canopy comes. Basically, at the end, but window frames are a problem sometimes. Regards Vivian ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures and the Transparency Mask
Innis Cunningham wrote: Hi All I have run into a bit of a problem using the transparency mask. Firstly I have an engine texure that when the mask is not present the texure is quite smooth but when I add the mask to the texture the side of the engine looks like a series of planks laid side by side(probably a bad explanation).Has anyone else experienced anything like this. Secoundly when I look through the transparent Windows I can see some parts of the fuselage interior and some parts not(the fuselage is 2 sided).The other day I was modifying the model and I got most of the interior to show through the widows.But then I moded it again and now only part of the fuselage shows again.It is like the transparency needs to see the parts of the model in a certian order but I have not been able to figure out how to do it. Has anybody got any ideas on this. If I place myself inside the fuselage and look around every thing looks fine.All I can see is the interior of the plane but if I look in through a window then I see the effect described above. Any help greatly appreciated In order to see what is behind a transparent surface, the things behind must be drawn *before* the transparent surfaces. This is true if the non transparent surfaces come before the transparent one in the model. You can do this by reordering part with the modeler ( I think ac3d as a panel to do this ) or by ordering them with animations in the xml file as I describe in a previous thread. It is sometime hard to have the correct ordering for both sides so I prefer to have two single-sided object rather than a single double-sided one. This way, I can tweak ordering independantly for all view directions. This was especially useful for the bridge that make a great use of transparent textures ( look at east bay bridge to see what I mean ). HTH -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures and the Transparency Mask
Thanks Fred and Vivian What I have is a full fuselage object that has a texture with a mask applied to add the transparent windows. As the fuselage is all one object I cant move it up or down. What I will try is to fragment the fuselage and move the surfaces that will be tranparent to the bottom and re merge the object and see what happens. Thanks again Cheers Innis Frederic Bouvierwrites In order to see what is behind a transparent surface, the things behind must be drawn *before* the transparent surfaces. This is true if the non transparent surfaces come before the transparent one in the model. You can do this by reordering part with the modeler ( I think ac3d as a panel to do this ) or by ordering them with animations in the xml file as I describe in a previous thread. It is sometime hard to have the correct ordering for both sides so I prefer to have two single-sided object rather than a single double-sided one. This way, I can tweak ordering independantly for all view directions. This was especially useful for the bridge that make a great use of transparent textures ( look at east bay bridge to see what I mean ). HTH -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel _ Find love today with ninemsn personals. Click here: http://ninemsn.match.com?referrer=hotmailtagline ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures and the Transparency Mask
Are you trying to do the passenger cabin windows or the cockpit windows? For the cockpit/flightdeck, you're really going to have to model the windows and frames - this can be tricky work but it's really the only way to get a decent VC environment. For the passenger cabin windows, I think it's better not to make them transparent at all and fake them with a suitable picture or just a colour shade - usually a simple dark black-blue colour is ok. The problem with trying to make windows using transparency is that when you look through the windows from the outside, looking into the fuselage, you'll be seeing the back-face of the polys making up the other side of the fuselage. If you're using single-sided polys the other side of the fuselage will not be rendered, so you'll see straight through to the land or sky behind - looks odd. I can't remember exactly what happens if you use double-sided polys, but think there were problems with that approach too, quite apart from increasing the render work-load. Splitting the fuselage into left and right hand sides only works from one side - the order is wrong from the other side. Trying to do the cockpit using transparency brings all the above problems plus the inevitable 'fade' between transparent and non-transparent objects. LeeE On Wednesday 14 July 2004 14:02, Innis Cunningham wrote: Thanks Fred and Vivian What I have is a full fuselage object that has a texture with a mask applied to add the transparent windows. As the fuselage is all one object I cant move it up or down. What I will try is to fragment the fuselage and move the surfaces that will be tranparent to the bottom and re merge the object and see what happens. Thanks again Cheers Innis Frederic Bouvierwrites In order to see what is behind a transparent surface, the things behind must be drawn *before* the transparent surfaces. This is true if the non transparent surfaces come before the transparent one in the model. You can do this by reordering part with the modeler ( I think ac3d as a panel to do this ) or by ordering them with animations in the xml file as I describe in a previous thread. It is sometime hard to have the correct ordering for both sides so I prefer to have two single-sided object rather than a single double-sided one. This way, I can tweak ordering independantly for all view directions. This was especially useful for the bridge that make a great use of transparent textures ( look at east bay bridge to see what I mean ). HTH -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel _ Find love today with ninemsn personals. Click here: http://ninemsn.match.com?referrer=hotmailtagline ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures and the Transparency Mask
Lee Elliott wrote: Splitting the fuselage into left and right hand sides only works from one side - the order is wrong from the other side. And the normals are not matching at the join so there is clearly a seam and an illumination artefact between the two sides. This is pretty evident on the 737. You can avoid this by joining the two sides and removing the duplicated vertices. -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures and the Transparency Mask
Thanks Lee Lee Elliott writes Are you trying to do the passenger cabin windows or the cockpit windows? Both For the cockpit/flightdeck, you're really going to have to model the windows and frames - this can be tricky work but it's really the only way to get a decent VC environment. What I have now is not bad and will do till the VC is done. For the passenger cabin windows, I think it's better not to make them transparent at all and fake them with a suitable picture or just a colour shade - usually a simple dark black-blue colour is ok. I can do that but will have a play and see how close I can get.It if it still looks bad I will do what you say.Its just a matter of changing the mask. The problem with trying to make windows using transparency is that when you look through the windows from the outside, looking into the fuselage, you'll be seeing the back-face of the polys making up the other side of the fuselage. If you're using single-sided polys the other side of the fuselage will not be rendered, so you'll see straight through to the land or sky behind - looks odd. I can't remember exactly what happens if you use double-sided polys, but think there were problems with that approach too, quite apart from increasing the render work-load. The size of the model does not seem to effect frame rates in FG.I get nearly the same rate if I use the cessna or the an225.I have tried with the fuselage double sided and single sided the frame rates seem to be the same. Splitting the fuselage into left and right hand sides only works from one side - the order is wrong from the other side. Trying to do the cockpit using transparency brings all the above problems plus the inevitable 'fade' between transparent and non-transparent objects. I guess we will be able to see how bad this is when I give the model to David Culp for the hangar.I think the airplane folder is big enough already in the base package. LeeE Cheers Innis _ ½ Price FOXTEL Digital Installation On-Line Limited Offer: http://ad.au.doubleclick.net/clk;9412514;9681905;p?http://www.foxtel.tv ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures model question
Matevz Jekovec writes: 1) How do I export textures from Blender to FlightGear (and set/preserve mapping coords) Just stick the texture file in the same directory as the *.ac model. Make sure that the texture file is in a format that plib can use (like *.rgb), and that its dimensions are powers of two. 2) I have those white lines (maybe very lit faces, I'm not sure) noticable on wings, air intakes, stabilizators and tail. Any ideas what are those and how do I get rid of them? (looks good in Blender though) Those might be extra edges with no faces attached -- plib draws them as lines. 3) Where can I get manuals or info for FlightGear aircraft structures, controled surfaces, physic files etc. That's the biggie. YASim's a lot easier to get started -- for the physics, pick the YASim file closest to your aircraft (from $FG_ROOT/Aircraft-yasim/) and start modifying it. For the animations, look at some of the existing files to get started. All the best, David -- David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures model question
Matevz Jekovec wrote: Greetings to all. I'm doing my J-22 model in Blender for quite some time now and I already managed to export it to FlightGear (just replaced ufo.ac model with my one:)). Now I have some n00b qustion: 1) How do I export textures from Blender to FlightGear (and set/preserve mapping coords) Just copy the texture file where you put the .ac file. You can hand edit the .ac file to remove the absolute path but it is not mandatory. 2) I have those white lines (maybe very lit faces, I'm not sure) noticable on wings, air intakes, stabilizators and tail. Any ideas what are those and how do I get rid of them? (looks good in Blender though) This is a problem with the .AC loader of PLIB that don't recognize sharp edge and want to smooth the entire object. The only cure so far is to split objects along sharp edges. 3) Where can I get manuals or info for FlightGear aircraft structures, controled surfaces, physic files etc. Look for .xml files near .ac files where there are tags named animation.../animation There is a quick guide here : http://www.flightgear.org/Docs/fgfs-model-howto.html Here are some screenshots from Blender: http://www2.arnes.si/~mjekov/tmp/blender-001.jpg http://www2.arnes.si/~mjekov/tmp/blender-002.jpg and FlightGear: http://www2.arnes.si/~mjekov/tmp/fg-001.jpg http://www2.arnes.si/~mjekov/tmp/fg-002.jpg http://www2.arnes.si/~mjekov/tmp/fg-003.jpg http://www2.arnes.si/~mjekov/tmp/fg-004.jpg http://www2.arnes.si/~mjekov/tmp/fg-005.jpg The loader don't find the texture file and it smooth the edges. -Fred ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
