Why use High Poly - Sketch Up ... instead of learnig GMax & Blender
- Thread starter cascaderailroad
- Start date
Hi,
I fully agree with that. The problem seems to be that there are too many who do not seem to care about that. Content creation needs some amount of skill, which must be learned and there is nothing elitist about that.
Cheers,
Konni
I fully agree with that. The problem seems to be that there are too many who do not seem to care about that. Content creation needs some amount of skill, which must be learned and there is nothing elitist about that.
Cheers,
Konni
amigacooke
Well-known member
#6468 J1
I personly think it takes just as much time and skill to draw a Engine in Sketch up as do other programs..We all understand about poly count, but I truly believe that someday it won't make any difference..You can believe Cascade if you want to..But try to remember that we are trainzers just like you..
I personly think it takes just as much time and skill to draw a Engine in Sketch up as do other programs..We all understand about poly count, but I truly believe that someday it won't make any difference..You can believe Cascade if you want to..But try to remember that we are trainzers just like you..
Exactly my point. It's not the tool, it's the person using it that matters.
When that happy day arrives, you can use all the polys you want in objects you share with others. But untl then, those that know how to create without using excessive amounts of polys will always be prized and praised over and above those that can't or wont.
PS, nice engine. How's the poly count?
Last edited:
That's a good idea, Ed but I don't want to be the one to "call out" the offending assets and cause hurt feelings. We have to think of a tactful way of going about this.
As I've pointed out before, and others have eluded to in so many words including me, that no matter what tool we use we have to use our tools with skill and think things through.
John
I disagree John. Simply adding a kuid to a thread that lists kuids of performance hobbling assets (for whatever reason) is not an attack on a specific creator. A creator wants feedback, and too often doesn't get any, except for compliments. While those are fine, they don't address issues the creator may not be aware of.
Case in point: my humble reskins of buildings, most of which are made by Dave Snow. It was recently, almost accidentally pointed out to me that a routebuilder thought the nightmode was too bright. After his comment, others agreed. Now, I sure would have liked to have known that oh, about two or three hundred reskins ago!
I wouldn't be offended to see a kuid of mine on a list of kuids that need work. I may be able to fix it, I may choose not too, but allow someone else to do so, but if it was a problem that would affect other assets I may have in the works, I would surely like to know. If the creator doesn't want to know, or doesn't want to change the way they do things, then that's okay, but the rest of us would at least know who to avoid on the DLS.
I say it's time to name names and kick butt!
I second this. There does however need to be a clear criteria for what constitutes a 'problem asset' here, or it could perhaps turn into a "you added my asset, so i'll add your asset" fight. Hopefully not, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised.
chris
Hi,
@WindWalkr,
I agree with you, but there should also be an easy option for a content creator to have his asset simply removed from the DLS, at least if one of his assets come up in such a thread.
Years ago, when I was working with gmax for 04 and my modeling skills still in their infancy I uploaded a number of assets which no longer meet my own standards. I am mildly embarrassed that some of them are still on the DLS.
Since updating them would amount to a complete rebuild, which I do not care for, from the one or other reason, I would like to have the option to have such assets deleted.
With so many assets on the DLS, a little pruning might be quite useful.
Cheers,
Konni
@WindWalkr,
I agree with you, but there should also be an easy option for a content creator to have his asset simply removed from the DLS, at least if one of his assets come up in such a thread.
Years ago, when I was working with gmax for 04 and my modeling skills still in their infancy I uploaded a number of assets which no longer meet my own standards. I am mildly embarrassed that some of them are still on the DLS.
Since updating them would amount to a complete rebuild, which I do not care for, from the one or other reason, I would like to have the option to have such assets deleted.
With so many assets on the DLS, a little pruning might be quite useful.
Cheers,
Konni
Last edited:
Except then we will see a load of routes with missing dependencies. So not such a great idea.
I'm just the same - some of my early assets are not so great, but they could still be used in the background, and some of them I may eventually upload an improved version. It would be quite nice to be able to ammend the DLS description to say 'do not download - it's not very good' on your own content, though...
There are some assets that certainly should be flagged, and in one or two cases, the entire portfolio of some of our most prolific creators. The problem is that some creators will certainly take this personally, and the question is 'are we propared to lose them if they throw their toys out of the pram?' We've lost talented prolific creators for the smallest of perceived slights - this could be a virtual bloodbath. Mind you, I try to avoid most of teh assets in question anyway...
Paul
amigacooke
Well-known member
Isn't that the point. The DLS has always been available for those who are learning and extending their skills. However, now it appears that courtesy is not to be extended to the next generation of potentially talented creators.
They are expected to be the finished product and to keep their learning process to themselves.
A few observations.
Not every creator uses the forum, so you may get those who haven't got a clue that there is a problem with High Poly assets and would be perfectly happy to amend their methods if they knew about it, along with those who are not bothered if it works for them.
Some, myself included started creating stuff by looking at items done in the past. When I started it seemed that lots of image files for the textures was the way to go as most of what I looked at was done that way, by using this forum I pretty soon twigged that it wasn't a particularly efficient way of doing things, so I started condensing everything into one image file where possible on my newer items and have a lot of older ones to update, lucky I think for me I haven't uploaded any of them yet as they are route specific.
One item I've just updated has gone from 49k raw image size to 3k just by making all the image files into one, and the item looks no different.
Rather than possibly creating world war three on here by naming and shaming, in many cases innocent creators unaware there is a problem, it maybe more tactful to list items as only suitable for high end PC's? Not as Performance crippling.
Regarding Sketchup, It would seem to me that the majority of high poly items are just straightforward exports of something from the 3d Warehouse with no attempt to refine them. I tried a couple of buildings as an experiment and got the poly count right down just by getting rid of duplicate planes and the parts you can't see, I also reduced the number of image files used, mostly duplicates from a few dozen to 4 or 5, just a case of spending a bit more time on it than open in Sketchup and export to Trainz. I suspect the Pro version of Sketchup is more capable of creating more efficient models, any one tried it?
Not every creator uses the forum, so you may get those who haven't got a clue that there is a problem with High Poly assets and would be perfectly happy to amend their methods if they knew about it, along with those who are not bothered if it works for them.
Some, myself included started creating stuff by looking at items done in the past. When I started it seemed that lots of image files for the textures was the way to go as most of what I looked at was done that way, by using this forum I pretty soon twigged that it wasn't a particularly efficient way of doing things, so I started condensing everything into one image file where possible on my newer items and have a lot of older ones to update, lucky I think for me I haven't uploaded any of them yet as they are route specific.
One item I've just updated has gone from 49k raw image size to 3k just by making all the image files into one, and the item looks no different.
Rather than possibly creating world war three on here by naming and shaming, in many cases innocent creators unaware there is a problem, it maybe more tactful to list items as only suitable for high end PC's? Not as Performance crippling.
Regarding Sketchup, It would seem to me that the majority of high poly items are just straightforward exports of something from the 3d Warehouse with no attempt to refine them. I tried a couple of buildings as an experiment and got the poly count right down just by getting rid of duplicate planes and the parts you can't see, I also reduced the number of image files used, mostly duplicates from a few dozen to 4 or 5, just a case of spending a bit more time on it than open in Sketchup and export to Trainz. I suspect the Pro version of Sketchup is more capable of creating more efficient models, any one tried it?
I agree it is difficult to set accurate poly count limits to mark items as "high-poly". I think, however, that users should at least be warned about what they are going to download before they fill their HD with content which will turn their Trainz into a PowerPoint slide show.
I think people at N3V know what are the factors affecting frame rates, so it should be possible to implement the calculation of "frame rate impact index" for each item in Content Manager, taking into account poly count(s), LOD, number and size of textures, Then, if this index exceeds a set number the item can be marked in CM with a warning. CM already warns us if a low-poly object makes unnecessary use of LOD, why shouldn't it be able to perform this additional task?
If this will cause the disappearance of creators making 50k trash cans, I don't see that as a great loss for the community...
My first attempt at GMax was a lineside phone with 12,000 polys (I modelled U-shaped irons used to fasten the phone box to the pole, and all the cylinders were 32-sided). I never released it, and the current version has about 200 polys with no visual difference in game.
I think people at N3V know what are the factors affecting frame rates, so it should be possible to implement the calculation of "frame rate impact index" for each item in Content Manager, taking into account poly count(s), LOD, number and size of textures, Then, if this index exceeds a set number the item can be marked in CM with a warning. CM already warns us if a low-poly object makes unnecessary use of LOD, why shouldn't it be able to perform this additional task?
If this will cause the disappearance of creators making 50k trash cans, I don't see that as a great loss for the community...
My first attempt at GMax was a lineside phone with 12,000 polys (I modelled U-shaped irons used to fasten the phone box to the pole, and all the cylinders were 32-sided). I never released it, and the current version has about 200 polys with no visual difference in game.
johnwhelan
Well-known member
I think you need to take into account object size if you decide to tag for poly count or health warning them. I have a block of 48 terraced houses that weigh in at 3 or 4,000 polys but that works out at 83 polys per house which isn't bad including front and back gardens.
Cheerio John
Cheerio John
The community suffers as people produce "crap" so a few people can feel good about themselves.
It is a train simulator not a still-life diorama simulator. There is movement involved.
The "creators" are the ones not showing courtesy.
Harold
I also think that size should be a factor: a 10,000 poly blast furnace, is acceptable, but a street lamp with the same poly count is a criminal offence. If it is possible to calculate the size of the object "bounding box" (i.e. the volume occupied by the object itself), then size can also be considered as a factor: a 2x2x2 metres object with 5,000 polys would be classified as a "high poly item", a 200x200x20 object not.
Well if a verdict can't be reached in 15 pages...
I'll throw another cat in the ring and ask about..
Curvy 3d.. (insane laughter) :hehe:
I downloaded the demo but haven't had a chance to use it as yet.
Its intended use is for drawing things easily then it will make a 3d model out of them supposedly.
I'll throw another cat in the ring and ask about..
Curvy 3d.. (insane laughter) :hehe:
I downloaded the demo but haven't had a chance to use it as yet.
Its intended use is for drawing things easily then it will make a 3d model out of them supposedly.
amigacooke
Well-known member
The community seems to have survived to this point.
Sadly, there seems to be no sense of proportion in this discussion. Sure efficient content is the ideal, but the learning curve is becoming so steep that I can't see why anyone should bother really. A whole lot of work followed by a whole lot of complaints.
New creators used to be welcomed and encouraged. Where is the support now?
Hi,
The principle should be applied to routes as well. It would create problems only, if someone downloads old routes, containig old and obsolete content.
Actually, another reason to prune the DLS would be to prevent users from downloading and using crappy content on newly created routes.
There are many complaints about a supposedly poor performance of trainz, which are in reality due to poor content. Looking more closely at the quality of content would eliminate the roots of such complants.
Anyhow, I cannot see a reason, why content, which had been uploaded once, should stay on the DLS forever.
We also should make better use of the forum, particularly the content creating forum, than exchanging friendly banter. We should rather encourage discussions about content. This thread, for once, revealed that many users have no conception about what is needed to create good content, beyond making meshes and textures.
Cheers,
Konni
The principle should be applied to routes as well. It would create problems only, if someone downloads old routes, containig old and obsolete content.
Actually, another reason to prune the DLS would be to prevent users from downloading and using crappy content on newly created routes.
There are many complaints about a supposedly poor performance of trainz, which are in reality due to poor content. Looking more closely at the quality of content would eliminate the roots of such complants.
Anyhow, I cannot see a reason, why content, which had been uploaded once, should stay on the DLS forever.
We also should make better use of the forum, particularly the content creating forum, than exchanging friendly banter. We should rather encourage discussions about content. This thread, for once, revealed that many users have no conception about what is needed to create good content, beyond making meshes and textures.
Cheers,
Konni
Last edited:
Similar threads
