Engine with cab views that are NOT restricted?

[Euphod]

Inquiring minds want to know; the cab view is restricted by Trainz 12, does JR have engines with a cab view that circumvent this issue, or if not does JR have engines with an alternative cab view, such as an 'out the window' camera that does not show a restricted view?

 

[jointedrail]

Restricted Views? Help me to understand this a bit better... Do you mean the ability to move freely inside the cab? Or do you mean adding more views to the engines such as looking out the window and say perhaps, a conductor standing on the steps? Don't forget there is an option you can add to the trainzoptions.txt I believe that you can freely move about the cab. If not additional views such as looking out the windows I think could certainly be added without too much difficulty... I've always wanted a conductor view... Only downside to this that I know of is the fact the outside model always looks a bit strange when looking at it from the inside cab view. Interesting question, and I'm curious as to what Justin has to say about it... If he doesn't see this and post, I'll ask him about it for sure.

Thanks

Mike

 

[ivantr]

I.am reading the CCG and the trainz dev from up to down. And this is firing me. Read the " cabin-visible-from-outside * Type: Boolean * Desc: If true, makes the cab mesh visible from the outside view.
This is intended for objects with simple but obviously visible cab controls that are not enclosed - e.g. the controls to operate a transfer table. It would be far too much of a performance impact to use this on locomotive models, as locomotive cabs are very performance intensive.outside-visible-from-cabin * Type: Boolean * Desc: If true, makes the loco body mesh visible while in the cab interior view.
This is intended to be used with an interior where the cab controls that are not in an enclosed space - e.g. a transfer table. While using this on a traincar is not considered problematic from a performance perspective, please note this will require a very carefully designed cab and loco asset - both the inside of the loco mesh and the cab interior will be visible at the same time, and unless done very carefully, this is likely to cause graphical problems with overlapping polygons and unexpectedly visible or opaque surfaces "
http://online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/index.php5/KIND_Interior

But the problem would be that Traincar and interior polys would merge and it would kill the FPS . So a question comes to my mind. Is possible to add LODs to an imterior, because with this function, you could exit from train, while in cab mode l, and for example to hang in the front stairs as a engine coupler or to enter/exit a coachcar while waiting on a station. But this will need to be adjusted from the CC to match the interior cab and the exterior mesh to not see artifacts. This would make trainz more real and im going to see how it works in my next project, when my PC will be back with the live world

Greetings

 

[jointedrail]

That an interesting read, thanks for posting it. I wonder if it's possible to add such views to another view? Could the outside cam also have different points you could switch between such as the cab does? This way you can still retain the cab view but also have the ability to see from different parts of the locomotive. Now see what you have started Ed?

Mike

 

[PWeiser]

Minimum Interior

That an interesting read, thanks for posting it. I wonder if it's possible to add such views to another view? Could the outside cam also have different points you could switch between such as the cab does? This way you can still retain the cab view but also have the ability to see from different parts of the locomotive. Now see what you have started Ed?

Mike

Speaking from my own experience with fairly crude home-made locomotives, the best setup so far (for the amateur creator, of course) is to have the gross interior details (down to the level of gauge faces but without their animated pointers, brake handles, etc.) be part of the main asset, i.e. the exterior meshes. They could then be restricted by LOD to save processing (though I haven't done this - my products are quite low-poly) but the upshot is that they're visible from outside.

The interior asset includes only (a) the animated parts of the gauges and (b) camera views, with exterior-visible-from-inside set true. When combined with external cams in the exterior mesh for views the interior cams cannot produce (mainly with Y-rotation, i.e. engineer's head naturally tilted when looking down the train or up the line from just outside the window) this seems to cover everything.

The only defect is that if there are dual controls visible from the main control stand, they lack indicator needles, animated throttle, etc. until the user switches to Alt-C view (at which point the main control stand loses them). Fortunately, this is not very easy to notice.

 

[sniper297]

Main problem when I start "kitbashing" cabs using the actual body mesh is the interior consoles intended to be visible from outside, along with the lower poly simple texture inside the cab itself. Along with that comes some models you can't even kludge around, windows that are opaque from the inside for example. If model creators would take the main mesh, strip out the insides so all you had was a basic cab shell and export that as an additional mesh, it would be easier to add control components without having to work around the clutter.

Not sure what Euphod is referring to "restricted", but for many of mine I've started removing the outside cameras and using PEV attachment maker to add a.outsideview0 (1,2,3 etc.) to the model itself, so when you cycle thru whatever interior cameras are in the cavbview itself, it automatically switches to the exterior attachments and cycles thru those before returning inside. Suggested downloads;

brakeman Oil Tanker XP,<kuid:522774:100138>
ChiMet_GP9 650,<kuid2:522774:100116:1>
CNW bi-level commuter car 1,<kuid:522774:100408>
CNW bi-level push-pull cab car 1,<kuid:522774:100409>
CNW F7A 1,<kuid:522774:100404>

Select any one of those, hit the 1 key, then [ and ] to see what those look like.

 

[itareus]

...the cab view is restricted by Trainz 12...

Not 100% sure what you mean here Ed, but if its the limited number of views using the [] keys you are referring to have you tried "-freeintcam" in the Trainzoptions.txt file in TS12? IIRC from my experiments in the past, this can also be used to get the position of the camera view so that it can be added to the config.txt of the cab for another [] position.

 

[clam1952]

Pure guess here but perhaps Ed means without the reduced draw distance in cab view?

 

[Euphod]

Pure guess here but perhaps Ed means without the reduced draw distance in cab view?

Exactly right. I'm sorry I did not word it in those terms. Is there a way to add a camera view to the INSIDE of a cab that does not have a reduced draw distance?

 

[RoysTrainz]

thanks Ed but you put people unintentional little bit on the wrong foot/track

Thanks Ed but Trainz in general from TRS2004 up in cab view is restricted to a limited draw distance for obvious reasons same like take real pictures with a camera details nearby(cab) and far distance focus (free roam view) go together like water and fire.
Again Picts says a thousands words and where I started asking around in Gordon's desert so to speak but no real answer other than distant mountain echo's.

This pict is the first in 7 years showing in cab and outside the way it should be in cab details sharp enough and outside crispy and far.....
I did start inquiries and questions on this subject in TRS 2006 but no one interested/answered as many times I throw something in the arena but the lions not even lift their heads... until Miss Nanny talks about it even not pointing correctly and see all the lions and second hand lions wake up and run around.

My real question's how to tweak freak a xx additional camera viewpoint in the cabin same way trainzer Ocemy did on his ND5 but additional draw distance like free roaming without upsetting the cabin view getting distorted...


This here is off the record just getting it of my chest and share it with the culprits in question:
Amazing how certain individuals calling themselves official partner of xxxx jump on this nice effort from Ed answering and questioning well mannered yes like it should be.
Now when I started way back in May/June 2012 informal talks about who wanted to host my routes and got into talks with this group too their side initially very excited and honered I asked them and email conversations ended as fast as it started still waiting for their confirmation when best period for me to visit them to see how this could work: Imagine I was willing to spent a few K usd jumping (in this case )on a ghost wagon in a dark tunnel hearing the faint whistle of a yes you guessed right Mike on his jrsd60mac coming running over me.
But since the restricted draw distance kicked in here too and lucky its just a virtual world and small bad dream I started things on my own thanks to that mishap how disrespectful I have to admit YES Mike you did me a favor after all!

So Froobie might my right though I not understand what is different in the MAC versus WIN7 trainz version handling camera attachments and draw distance.
Very curious who can really shed light on this phenomena other than N3V James Moody or Murphy or anyone I don't know over there yet.

have a great night/day

Roy

 

[matruck]

This here is off the record just getting it of my chest and share it with the culprits in question:
Amazing how certain individuals calling themselves official partner of xxxx jump on this nice effort from Ed answering and questioning well mannered yes like it should be.
Now when I started way back in May/June 2012 informal talks about who wanted to host my routes and got into talks with this group too their side initially very excited and honered I asked them and email conversations ended as fast as it started still waiting for their confirmation when best period for me to visit them to see how this could work: Imagine I was willing to spent a few K usd jumping (in this case )on a ghost wagon in a dark tunnel hearing the faint whistle of a yes you guessed right Mike on his jrsd60mac coming running over me.
But since the restricted draw distance kicked in here too and lucky its just a virtual world and small bad dream I started things on my own thanks to that mishap how disrespectful I have to admit YES Mike you did me a favor after all!

Why are we now culprit's ?. I think i'll call shenanigan's on this...
Cheers Mick.:hehe:

 

[RoysTrainz]

Wow unexpected nice reply but what is Shenanigan?

sorry but english is not my native language.....
:Yead on time for sure you stand for your avatar, appreciate the reply but not understand sorry.
Matruck I never had conversation or differences with you only but very briefly with Mike and the other guy in FL, so any relay back to them and closure of this in a nice way and friends again would be nice I assume as its not worth even fighting for.

have a nice day Matruck

Roy

 

[norfolksouthern37]

Exactly right. I'm sorry I did not word it in those terms. Is there a way to add a camera view to the INSIDE of a cab that does not have a reduced draw distance?

not unless the cab view is also part of the exterior model, and that is just - to put a lighthearted term to it, polygon suicide. most cabs at least those being made by myself are at least as detailed as the actual locomotive is on the outside. so putting them both together might work if a single were used, but keep adding multiple units and you would quickly degrade performance needlessly. there are also other reasons why this wouldnt work.

i wonder if you and others believe that the draw distance is limited in the cab view by the developers just to annoy you, not saying you do, but just wonder if that is the case. there is a reason for it however. it would degrade both the cab interior and the distant horizon if they were both showed at the same time. tiny readouts like gauges might not be possible if the draw limit were 5000m as it is externally. this is because a graphic thing called the z buffer needs to sort the polygons drawn by their order from the view. there isnt really a performance friendly option here other than to reduce the far draw distance to prevent artifacts.

attach points can be placed on the outside of models that cycle though from the cab camera as sniper has illustrated, useful for headout views and views from the footboards etc. these use the exterior world camera and are not limited by the in cab camera settings.

Thanks Ed but Trainz in general from TRS2004 up in cab view is restricted to a limited draw distance for obvious reasons same like take real pictures with a camera details nearby(cab) and far distance focus (free roam view) go together like water and fire.
Again Picts says a thousands words and where I started asking around in Gordon's desert so to speak but no real answer other than distant mountain echo's.

This pict is the first in 7 years showing in cab and outside the way it should be in cab details sharp enough and outside crispy and far.....
I did start inquiries and questions on this subject in TRS 2006 but no one interested/answered as many times I throw something in the arena but the lions not even lift their heads... until Miss Nanny talks about it even not pointing correctly and see all the lions and second hand lions wake up and run around.

I recall no such questions on such things, but you see the answer in any case above.

My real question's how to tweak freak a xx additional camera viewpoint in the cabin same way trainzer Ocemy did on his ND5 but additional draw distance like free roaming without upsetting the cabin view getting distorted...

Are you referring to ouside views on this item (ND5)?

This here is off the record just getting it of my chest and share it with the culprits in question:
Amazing how certain individuals calling themselves official partner of xxxx jump on this nice effort from Ed answering and questioning well mannered yes like it should be.
Now when I started way back in May/June 2012 informal talks about who wanted to host my routes and got into talks with this group too their side initially very excited and honered I asked them and email conversations ended as fast as it started still waiting for their confirmation when best period for me to visit them to see how this could work: Imagine I was willing to spent a few K usd jumping (in this case )on a ghost wagon in a dark tunnel hearing the faint whistle of a yes you guessed right Mike on his jrsd60mac coming running over me.
But since the restricted draw distance kicked in here too and lucky its just a virtual world and small bad dream I started things on my own thanks to that mishap how disrespectful I have to admit YES Mike you did me a favor after all!

Not to be disrespectful or offensive, but you are extremely hard to understand. I realize it is probably not your fault entirely but I hardly understand anything you said above let alone in this colorful portion of your message. You just got a little overbearing and overnight started demanding a response from us. it suffices to say that made us stand off a bit and wonder who we are dealing with. maybe it is this apparent language barrier that is the cause, i do not know, but in any case airing your thoughts here is not the right course of action.​

 

[Euphod]

i wonder if you and others believe that the draw distance is limited in the cab view by the developers just to annoy you, not saying you do, but just wonder if that is the case. there is a reason for it however. it would degrade both the cab interior and the distant horizon if they were both showed at the same time. tiny readouts like gauges might not be possible if the draw limit were 5000m as it is externally. this is because a graphic thing called the z buffer needs to sort the polygons drawn by their order from the view. there isnt really a performance friendly option here other than to reduce the far draw distance to prevent artifacts.

Thanks for the explanation. I understand the reason the draw distance was reduced, but I also understand the desire of members to be able to "see" their routes in all their glory (or not) through the windshield of their lead unit. I wonder if it would be lucrative to build such a model of an engine that is widely used by the Class 1's that the user could operate as a 'one off' on the point of their consist when they just want to admire the landscape. Just a thought.

 

[SR6900]

That an interesting read, thanks for posting it. I wonder if it's possible to add such views to another view? Could the outside cam also have different points you could switch between such as the cab does? This way you can still retain the cab view but also have the ability to see from different parts of the locomotive. Now see what you have started Ed?

Mike

Hey Mike, tell him to use the a.outsideview attachment on the main mesh, not the cab mesh. This will allow, when scrolling through views, that the camera temporary be switched out of the main cabview onto a point centered and aimed, I believe, along the negative y axis. This was an attachment that used to be used a lot that's been seemingly forgotten about.

 

[norfolksouthern37]

Thanks for the explanation. I understand the reason the draw distance was reduced, but I also understand the desire of members to be able to "see" their routes in all their glory (or not) through the windshield of their lead unit. I wonder if it would be lucrative to build such a model of an engine that is widely used by the Class 1's that the user could operate as a 'one off' on the point of their consist when they just want to admire the landscape. Just a thought.

i dont know. as i mentioned above, certain things just probably wont work. you say you understand both points, but you dont seem to understand that the reason it was done because, it either wont work at all or (most likely) will not look very good the way people 'desire'. it just isnt feasible to have that accuracy required to display small objects you can interact with and be within millimeters of each other as well as displaying things that are 5km away. it is very likely an engine limitation, but it makes sense to me either way. most similar situations in simulators have the same limitations, but the difference here is they usually have stand in's for the parts missing due to the draw distance. all of that being said, i do not think it would be of benefit to circumvent the so called limitations of the cab view. to me it would be akin to fixing something that isnt really broken in attempt to address a problem - one that is not really related to the cab view at all.

 

[sniper297]

I generally have my distance limited anyway to keep framerates playable, but one thing I'm wondering about;

"putting them both together might work if a single were used, but keep adding multiple units and you would quickly degrade performance needlessly"

You remember the MSTS light count bug and cabview rendering penalties for MUs? Mike Simpson added a utility to Route Riter to clone the model and make it undrivable, with no cabview and simplified lights. Possibly a unlimited view cab version and a limited cab version used in combination might work for that, or even a version with no cabview at all to use as only helpers or AI locos. I tried that to reduce the AI train performance hit, unfortunately it had no effect.

 

[Euphod]

Justin, I think you be looking at this from a position of having too much knowledge.:hehe: Is the draw distance limited when the camera view is inside a passenger car or caboose? Is it limited when any view originates from an interior, or just from a cab? I understand the reasons as much as I need to understand them, obviously the developer is trying to save us from ourselves by limiting the draw distance from the locomotive cab view because of the problems you mentioned. I just don't understand why there can't be a model that is essentially a locomotive in form and appearance with a view from the cab. I suppose the model wouldn't actually have to function as a locomotive, and I also suppose the instruments wouldn't have to work, obviously from what you posted that would be asking too much.

Well, it doesn't matter, I'm not suggesting that you guys make such a thing. I only posed the question in the first place because someone else thought you offered an engine that had an unrestricted cab view and asked me about it, so I thought I'd ask you. Curious.

 

[Enzo1]

A more intresting idea for a feature would be to have a working computer where you can control the other DPU's through the computer... Would be really kool idea

 

[norfolksouthern37]

ah i see... well yes the draw distance is limited any time the interior camera is used. there could be a combined version with i suppose a view the camera could affix itself to inside the cab but it would be a waste of detail in my opinion. all that just for one view that someone might not even want. it would kinda be like modeling the engine under the hood - and that i have thought about doing . i have a hard enough time justifying loading an entire train of boxcars with loads you cant even see unless you open the doors. that's hundreds of thousands of polygons that are still being drawn but are being drawn with the boxcar over them so you cant see them. big waste. of course some sneaky ways of scripting could be involved.... buuut anyway that still does nothing to combat the z problem, where the inside and small objects might have trouble drawing so close to the camera or user view.

I don't do anything in the cabs far as draw distance goes, i guess it doesnt bother me. when i am in the cab it is because i want to drive the train, and i am watching the immediate track and my instruments, not sight-seeing. i do understand the need for increased draw distance, and i am sure something will be taken care of in the future, but at this time, i have nothing to offer.