TRS19 PBR Baseboards causing visual problems

[euromodeller]

I make model railway layouts as well as larger routes.

I was updating my Warrenberg Model from TANE to TRS19 when I came upon a serious flaw with edges.

I made this..

OK, no problems with that procedure, but when you go down to track level you see this..

I switched to wireframe and found normal edges....

Which looks like this in the model with assets floating near the edges.

Switching shaders to standard the rolling effect stops.

This is a big fail to me, I really wanted to use PBR textures on my TRS19 models.

Also happens on mountain edges, cuttings etc on which the PBR textures seems to move as you drive by it.

Is this forever or will it get sorted out?


(I also noticed it in one of Philskene's videos)

 

[WindWalkr]

Switching shaders to standard the rolling effect stops.

This is a big fail to me, I really wanted to use PBR textures on my TRS19 models.

Also happens on mountain edges, cuttings etc on which the PBR textures seems to move as you drive by it.

Is this forever or will it get sorted out?

It's "forever", however it doesn't prevent the use of parallax textures. The key point is that you shouldn't try to use parallax textures in areas where the normal (ie. the gradient) is changing rapidly. It will work beautifully on relatively straight areas (regardless of the gradient). It will work well enough on flowing hills. It will work poorly on cuttings, and extremely poorly on "hard right angle" cliff edges as you're showing in your screenshot.

Parallax textures are not an "all or nothing" - you can choose to use non-parallax textures in areas where parallax wouldn't look very good, and still use parallax on the rest of the route. You can also use the age-old approach of covering such sharp edges using a spline, scenery, etc. There are plenty of foliage splines, cliff splines, boulders, etc. around that you can use for this kind of thing.

chris

 

[euromodeller]

I half expected that answer.

On small model routes you can't just cover up every rapid gradient change with something.

As for mixing PBR and non PBR textures, that causes more problems with the ground where they meet, even if you cover the joint with a road spline.

Of course, we weren't informed of this new 'feature' before we purchased were we?

Totally unimpressed cosidering that PBR textures were a major marketing point.

 

[-Basti-]

To be that sounds like "We've created an awesome car, but if you're driving fast, it's behaving strange"...

When I look outside, there's a lot of sharp edges, it's not everywhere like in the netherlands...

In another thread I've read some time ago that PBR-Textures can behave strangely when mixed with normal textures... (it was a thread regarding objects above PBR-surfaces).

 

[clam1952]

I dropped the idea of using PBR on anything with a slope 30 seconds after trying it!

The burying issue, If you drop the pbr textures to minimum size and apply either side and under track on a small radius it will actually align with the track and not bury it! it does initially and takes a lot of reapplying though and only works on flat ground. Basically where buried keep applying around the area and it seems to sort it out, rather tedious and time consuming though.

Also blends better with existing textures if on the minimum size / resolution. Textures on cliffs etc have always been problematic due to the stretching on the grid, main reason I make splines for cuttings and embankments which also avoids the atrocious rendering of curved embankments and cuttings when using the smooth button, even at 5m it's far too wide anyway for NG routes!

Back to PBR most of the textures I've tried bearing in mind you are not supposed to use [ and ] keys with it, are to borrow a phrase from Harold (hminky), appear quilted and looks dreadful when viewed from a distance, may be OK for the flat earth society however doesn't do much for hilly and mountainous routes.

To add if you use the PBR ground textures at maximum settings over pre applied TurfFx there is a visible transparency at the bottom of the grass which appears to be hovering, is ok on the lowest settings.

It has been suggested that I convert my normal mapped ground textures to PBR, most are actually properly seamless so it might work however I am very sceptical as they actually look quite good as they are in TRS19.

I'm thinking that the current crop of PBR textures are using excessive height settings which is amplifying the problem?

 

[euromodeller]

It's a big let down for me, I'll be using textures from Malc and Rudefx for my model layouts for TRS19 but will continue with PBR on normal (bigger) routes if possible.

I've spent many hours with PBR groundtex problems experimenting and trying to make it look right, but when the untextured boards show this 'feature' at the edges It appears that I've wasted my time.

I've checked that using 'normal' groundtex does not show this 'edge feature' even on Ultra shader setting.

Well, back to creating model layouts for the Flat Earth Society to enjoy.

I wonder what I will discover next during route creation in TRS19?

 

[Laurinlaki]

One thing you can still do with PBR (that in my opinion looks a little better than those thick walls anyways) is not lowering the ground at all. Instead, everything outside the model railroad area is covered with large digholes. To still give the illusion that you are having a model railroad table, put some walls around the edge off your cut out that are sunken into the ground a bit, use one of the large model railroad floor splines for the floor below. The Marsz series of objects contains large pylons that can be used as feet for your table.
A demonstration of that:

or <kuid2:388413:100110:1> if you wanna take a look for yourself.
(This actually is based on my real layout which is a green board with tracks only intended for driving, I have Trainz for scenery after all )


This technique should prevent the issue from appearing with PBR textures



Greets, Mika

 

[philskene]

Hi Graham --

I agree with you comment about not mixing PBR and non-PBR textures. The result can be 'horrible.

But despite some issues I'm an enthusiastic supporter of the new textures. They add a whole new level of realism not achievable with the old textures. I now use them exclusively on my model layouts, for example:

Phil

 

[Roy3b3]

I make model railway layouts as well as larger routes.

I was updating my Warrenberg Model from TANE to TRS19 when I came upon a serious flaw with edges.

I made this..
OK, no problems with that procedure, but when you go down to track level you see this..
I switched to wireframe and found normal edges....
Which looks like this in the model with assets floating near the edges.
Switching shaders to standard the rolling effect stops.

This is a big fail to me, I really wanted to use PBR textures on my TRS19 models.
Also happens on mountain edges, cuttings etc on which the PBR textures seems to move as you drive by it.
Is this forever or will it get sorted out?
(I also noticed it in one of Philskene's videos)

HI, I duplicated your example (somewhat);... and I used the 5m baseboard, raised the track and terrain by 15m, then raised it again by another 5m with track laid. I didn't find any serious flaws or problems to get straight cut edges using the Sensitivity level wound back to zero. A steady hand is all that is required. Laying textures or placing assets at or over the edge was also no problem. Nothing was floating in space.

Cheers,
Roy

 

[euromodeller]

Thanks for your test Roy.
Did you have shader Quality at Ultra?, it's needed for PBR.
With Shader at standard there is no problem.
Also, try the point of view from a loco driver's height, that's when I first noticed the problem.
Post #2 suggests that N3V are aware of this effect.

Phil, I have watched yor video before, it's a goodun; but I did notice a rolling edge I think it was after about 7 minutes where it makes a tree float.
Also, I noticed your use of water near the board edges, this will hide the rolling but all routes don't have lakes.

Mika,
I have tried many experiments over the years with digholes, I tried them again with TRS19.
They are OK for the flat Earth society where everywhere is flat and sqared, but put any type of hill/slope near the edge and you get this effect..

Did you notice the nice floor and eging in my shot?
Some guy with a username of euromodeller has lots of model railway building items in content manager/dls, you should take a look

There are other problems with using digholes in TRS19 (v4.6) which is probably why they aren't supported any more according to the Wiki. See above screenshot where the ground floats above a level front edge, you can see the other 3 edges that from a different angle look OK. Paralaxed!
Raising the edging board to 1.00 above ground solves that problem.


I'll find a workaround at some point, I don't like the idea of giving up on 3d textures for TRS19 models.

I find if I go away from the problem and work on something else that is unrelated then I might get an idea of a solution.

Time for a coffee I think.

 

[ray_whiley]

One thing you can still do with PBR (that in my opinion looks a little better than those thick walls anyways) is not lowering the ground at all. Instead, everything outside the model railroad area is covered with large digholes.​

I agree fully - the thick edges look unrealistic to me and I have always used digholes for simulated model railways. There are several edging splines available, and I also made supporting cupboards to provide the necessary storage space under a fixed layout! These have been very well modified by euromodeller - and I prefer them to my originals.

Ray

 

[MSGSapper]

In my efforts and experimentation with the new 3D PBR ground textures I have found out more or less what has been said in this thread. To summarize:

a. They don't mix well with 2D textures. Where there is mixing of 2D and 3D you will see along the edge between the two something hovering although it is barely noticeable in most cases, and only if you look closely.

b. Anything with a sharp edge produces a rolling effect as you approach that sharp edge. I saw this happen with my new coal texture when I applied it to a sharp edged mound of coal. I wasn't sure what I was seeing at the time but do now since I have read this thread.

c. I have also noticed a tendency to cause problems with some splines but was able to solve that by either adjusting the height of the spline at that point or using a 2D texture at that point. This may just be an issue only appearing with mixing of 2D and 3D textures where it intersects with the spline.

At this point I don't see these as big issues as I intend to replace almost every 2D texture on my 14 routes with new 3D PBR ones that I have created myself in most cases. The results in overall appearance of the routes after using the new 3D PBR ground textures is more then worth the effort in my opinion. I can understand that other route developers may not feel that way however.....

I expect in time further tweaking by N3V will resolve some of the issues. For me 3D is the future of textures and after seeing the difference in appearance of my layouts with these new textures it would be hard for me to go back.

Bob

 

[euromodeller]

I have reached a compromise.
I have sorted out the hills at the edges problem, (See post #10) you do them before using digholes whilst the ground is at zero.
I don't like the space under the layout when using digholes so I used some of my own items to create this with PBR ground textures...

Will it pass muster?

Of course there is still the problem of curves and angles for baseboard edges to ovecome.
I'll try my method on my Warrenberg layout TRS19 update and see how it goes.

 

[Roy3b3]

Thanks for your test Roy.
Did you have shader Quality at Ultra?, it's needed for PBR.
With Shader at standard there is no problem.
Also, try the point of view from a loco driver's height, that's when I first noticed the problem.
Post #2 suggests that N3V are aware of this effect.

Time for a coffee I think.

Graham,

Whoops! With my miniscule test, I did NOT have the shader quality at Ultra, it was set at Low.

After resetting,.... I too saw the distortion occurring at 'driver-height' when slowly panning across the edge.

This first shot shows a straight line edge.

The second shot begins the pan to the right, and where the curvature begins from the 5m mark. Also where the 10m line hung over the edge in the first shot, it now appears at the top while a small section of the terrain below it now raises beside the line.

Panning further right above the track in the 3rd shot, the 10m line now has dropped below the top surface, much more curvature downwards appears, as well as, the terrain further below that has begun distortion, stretching leftwards.

Panning further right again past the track, curvature from the 5m line towards the 10m line, which is now barely visible;....but now the terrain below the edge is distorted and now shows what appears to be another raised level, even though nothing had been touched.

If nothing is done to rectify this, then it means route builders will need to be mindful that every edge will need to be camouflaged with additional assets OR turn the Shader to Low.

Thanks also for the additional tips being passed around in this thread - Most helpful.

"One day perfection will be achieved"

Cheers,
Roy

 

[tume]

[FONT=&quot]Hello, [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]that is the thread I was looking for! I am about to convert my Milwaukee Road Project from TANE into TRS 2022 ... and faced the same problems as described here initially. Sharp edges and slopes beside - especially in cuts and/or beside embankments seems to move when moving alongside with the camera. Now I understood (due to this thread here) that this is a problem of the parallax effect itself. As far as I can understand that parallax effect is, that the height texture inside the alpha channel of the normal map influences the surface of the ground itself. The traditional ground texture always followed the ground tiles and only the normal map effect gave a little 3d-effect to us. But the "physical ground tiles" have never been changed by the ground texture. But the parallax effect of the PBR-Ground-Texture overlays the "physical ground tiles". Now the ground tile appears to be bent in a 3d-way. But this is only an imagination as the "physical ground tiles" itself is still a flat plane which. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I conclude that the height imagination crated by the parallax effect which shows us a 3d-deformated ground tile depends on the view angel. Are I am right so far?? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It would be a reason for the "moving" terrain when moving alongside with the camera. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]In addition to this I saw some problems at the areas where two different ground textures come together. The two different height textures inside the normal map alpha channels of the two textures creates two different "virtual ground tiles" in the area where the two ground textures overlaps each other. This also looks quite strange - especially at sharp edges but also in flat areas. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]If I understood all that thing right, and considering that it also creates problems to mix PBR and non PBR ground textures together, I conclude that problem could be solved if I create versions of PBR-Ground-Textures with only a minimum of height - perhaps I will try just a white texture as a height texture inside the alpha channel of the normal map to see what happens. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]But this can only be a solution for sharp edges and so on. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Perhaps there is anybody (maybe from N3V-Game itself) who understood that problems much better than me. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]If yes what I think ... I would like to ask about a description how to make two PBR-Ground-Textures especially to minimize the overlapping effect on two different "virtual ground tiles" and to minimize the strong 3d-bending of the "physical ground tiles" - just to create nice looking PBR-Ground-Textures for sharp edges. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A video tutorial would be very welcome [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Just in case there are already some tutorials about that, I would like to ask about a link onto it. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Thank you in advance. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Yours’s TUME[/FONT]

 

[pware]

TUME, did you check the date on the post just above yours? Just over 4 years old. Since then there have been no further posts until yours.

This does not mean that the problems you listed (plus others not listed) have gone away but that users have found solutions that work. My solutions have been to:-

• convert all ground textures to PBR
• only use track assets that use PBR textures
• drop my Shader quality setting from Ultra to Standard
• use scenery assets to help disguise other issues such as "patterning" (because texture rotation when painting is not recommended with PBR textures) and height issues on steep slopes

and, in my opinion at least, my layouts are all far better looking because of PBR textures, so it has been worth the effort. I, for one, will not go back to using non-PBR textures.

The problems described in this thread (and others) are inherent to PBR textures and occur in all games and sims that use them.

My observations and solutions
Peter

 

[tume]

Hello,

thank you for your answer!

No, I did not look onto the date of this thread. I was just looking for some help. And so I wrote something in here because this thread adresses the problems I face now as well.

I am about to switch my Milwaukee Road Project from TANE to TRS2022 right now. I just want using PBR Ground textures as well - I dont want to speak badly about it. I just want to understand, what I can do to get the problems solved described here above. Therefore I already converted my own ground textures to PBR. I changed my "non PBR ground textures" to my PBR Ground textures by using the asset repalcement tool.

Yesterday I created a PBR ground texture without height effect - by putting a complete white color into the alpha channel of its normal map. That gave me a PBR ground texture without height effect. The normal-map-effect remained at the texture and still it is a PBR texture. Going this way I could solve the problem, that the rocky texture right beside a road spline created big gaps below the road and so on.

Another issue I have is, that the PBR texture appeares a lot darker as the non PBR ground textures. Althought I used the same difuse texture from the non PBR as the the albedo in the PBR. As I changed all my textures in the route from my TANE non PBR ground textures to my new PBR ground textures this makes just my route appearing a darker. But the different can be seeen in the distance. Far away from the view point TRS2022 seems to switch the PBR ground textures to a less data intensive version. I guess some special PBR effects will be not supported anymore in the far distance - which is quite understandable for performance reasons and as the PBR effects can not be seen in the far distance anyway.
So this is fine to me. The only thing I am interested in is to learn what I need to do to create PBR gound textures which looks not darker next to the view point than far away from the view point. I guess I will have to change something inside the parameter texture, but I dont know what I will have to change.

May somebody can help me about that problems.

Your's TUME