PDA

View Full Version : Why use High Poly - Sketch Up ... instead of learnig GMax & Blender



Pages : [1] 2

cascaderailroad
April 9th, 2012, 06:57 AM
Seems that a rash of super High Poly assets are being created using Sketch Up.

These Super High Poly assets can adversely effect framerates in Trainz.

Personally I believe Sketch Up is for lazy people who don't want to learn how to create the real thing in a quality program, at low poly count ... and are taking the "Easy" way out !

boleyd
April 9th, 2012, 07:02 AM
I really like highly detailed assets. I actually do not download anything that is a small file size since I want maximum reality. Now, if the same level of quality can be achieved by other lower poly means that would be great. FPS are less an issue in my case than stutters caused by loading the stuff when the train is in motion.

e8600 DualCore 3ghz, nVidia 240gt 512mb, 8gb memory (1.3ghz), Windows 32bit

amigacooke
April 9th, 2012, 07:14 AM
Personally I believe Sketch Up is for lazy people who don't want to learn how to create the real thing in a quality program, at low poly count ... and are taking the "Easy" way out !Good heavens, why on earth take the easy way out. Oh wait a minute, because it's easy?

H222
April 9th, 2012, 07:18 AM
It's easy, and free. Case dismissed (always wanted to say that)

jamie

Euphod
April 9th, 2012, 07:22 AM
emptor Caveat

hminky
April 9th, 2012, 07:47 AM
Personally I believe Sketch Up is for lazy people who don't want to learn how to create the real thing in a quality program, at low poly count ... and are taking the "Easy" way out !
SketchUp can be used to create low poly models but most people want to pull things off Google Warehouse and claim they are "content creators".

I was looking thru DLS for a bakery and found one made from Google Warehouse and it was truly dreadful.

Harold

Pendolino
April 9th, 2012, 08:17 AM
I also appreciate a well done high-detail asset, but I rarely saw a bunch of ill-conceived meshes as the ones taken from Google Warehouse: most of these "models" seem to have an inordinate numeber of polys just for the sake of it (400ft buildings made as boxes - 12 polys - with 2 ft chimneys made as 2,000 poly cylinders). LOD, of course is an unspeakably evil practice that should be avoided at all costs :( or - maybe - requires much more skill that simply using a conversion software :D). Last, but not least, textures much too often consist of images taken from Google Maps or Google StreetView: the first are especially awful.

I can only strongly agree with hminky:


...most people want to pull things off Google Warehouse and claim they are "content creators".

Exactly... I would like to see if these wannabe "content creators" are able to make the classic "brick box" :(.

nfitzsimmons
April 9th, 2012, 08:45 AM
Seems that a rash of super High Poly assets are being created using Sketch Up.

These Super High Poly assets can adversely effect framerates in Trainz.

Personally I believe Sketch Up is for lazy people who don't want to learn how to create the real thing in a quality program, at low poly count ... and are taking the "Easy" way out !

Or possibly for the same reason as me. The same reason why I don't have a PhD in quantum physics. Lack of both time and skill.

Jananton
April 9th, 2012, 08:47 AM
Hmm, I said this before, it's not the question if you can model every crease and ornament, but how to do it within a reasonable amount of polys without losing the original impact of a piece of scenery. I am the last to say you can create a simple house with six polys, I've never done that, but you can have the same result as high poly scetchup meshes when you invest some time to learn what's needed and what can be omitted in a mesh.


It's easy, and free. Case dismissed (always wanted to say that)

jamie

Hmm, blender is free and easy too, if you know what you're doing. (that's what I allways say) :hehe:


Greetings from drizzly Amsterdam,

Jan

martinvk
April 9th, 2012, 09:16 AM
Seems that a rash of super High Poly assets are being created using Sketch Up. ... and are taking the "Easy" way out !Amen to that. There should be a special category on the DLS for these wannabees. Not everyone has the time or skill to create, no shame it that, but don't pretend.

Euphod
April 9th, 2012, 09:26 AM
I don't hold with such snobbery! Not everyone is able to master G Max or Blender, but they still want to contribute to the community and the game as a whole. I probably couldn't master Ruby, which is why I do reskins, but those who port into Trainz objects from the Google Warehouse should not be made to feel as second class creators! What is the percentage of those that contribute at all? I, for one will not be holding my nose in the air at those who have figured out a way to bring new models into Trainz. I will select what I can use, and consider the ramifications if and when I decide to make a route. Yes, the models may be high poly, but perhaps you have only one instance of requiring it to be in your route.

All creators should be celebrated, no matter what tools they use.

RRSignal
April 9th, 2012, 09:29 AM
Sometimes you need something quick 'n' dirty for a project: That's where 3dWarehouse comes in handy. Unfortunately, many people don't realize that many of these assets are high-poly and/or have insanely-oversized textures. The texture size is particularly problematic for many models, and many people don't realize how large they are because initially they are stored in JPG format. Also, I don't think a lot of 3DWwarehouse users realize that a lot of models have interiors. While I like that, and think such models can make for great easter eggs, models with interiors severely raise polycounts and can only be used very sparingly in a route if at all.

hminky
April 9th, 2012, 09:29 AM
I don't hold with such snobbery! Not everyone is able to master G Max or Blender, but they still want to contribute to the community and the game as a whole. I probably couldn't master Ruby, which is why I do reskins, but those who port into Trainz objects from the Google Warehouse should not be made to feel as second class creators! What is the percentage of those that contribute at all? I, for one will not be holding my nose in the air at those who have figured out a way to bring new models into Trainz. I will select what I can use, and consider the ramifications if and when I decide to make a route. Yes, the models may be high poly, but perhaps you have only one instance of requiring it to be in your route.

All creators should be celebrated, no matter what tools they use.
"Pirating" items form Google Warehouse doesn't make you a "Content Creator", not even second class, you are just a "pirate".

Google SketchUp can be used to create good content but stealing it is really lame.

Harold

Euphod
April 9th, 2012, 09:33 AM
There's no "pirating" taking place.

hminky
April 9th, 2012, 09:40 AM
There's no "pirating" taking place.
The use of someone's model is "pirating". I know the advocates of this practice claim that it isn't because Google Warehouse is a grey area.

Placing it on DLS with your name is "pirating".

Harold

Euphod
April 9th, 2012, 09:44 AM
You couldn't be more wrong in your assertion, but of course you don't care.

cascaderailroad
April 9th, 2012, 09:50 AM
Men are a bit like Pirates: They use/borrow/steal/break others peoples stuff ... leave food crumbs, and beverage spills everywhere ... and track mud all about the house.

Being a Pirate is kinda' fun ! http://www.piratesonlineforums.com/forums/images/smilies/pirates/pirate2wn0.gif http://www.piratesonlineforums.com/forums/images/smilies/pirates/pirate2do0.gif http://www.piratesonlineforums.com/forums/images/smilies/piratewheelgo2.gif http://www.piratesonlineforums.com/forums/images/smilies/pirates/Pirate4.gif http://www.piratesonlineforums.com/forums/images/smilies/icon_psmiley12.gif http://www.piratesonlineforums.com/forums/images/smilies/pirates/pirate6.gif http://www.piratesonlineforums.com/forums/images/smilies/psmiley22.gif http://www.piratesonlineforums.com/forums/images/smilies/pirates/12_1_138.gif http://www.pixiehollowforums.com/forums/images/smilies/Party/smiley4.gif

RRSignal
April 9th, 2012, 09:52 AM
The use of someone's model is "pirating". I know the advocates of this practice claim that it isn't because Google Warehouse is a grey area.

Placing it on DLS with your name is "pirating".

Harold

Read Google's ToS: http://sketchup.google.com/intl/en/3dwh/tos.html

Section 11.1(c) specifically permits importation, redistribution, etc. It's not a gray area at all.

Euphod
April 9th, 2012, 09:53 AM
Arrr...but "Talk like a pirate day" isn't until September nineteenth!

hminky
April 9th, 2012, 10:18 AM
Section 11.1(c) specifically permits importation, redistribution, etc. It's not a gray area at all.
Putting Google Warehouse content on DLS isn't "Public" it is commercial.

Not acknowledging the original creator is "pirating".

Harold

mikeman
April 9th, 2012, 10:18 AM
I hold Sketchup to be in the same mold as Guitar Hero. Made for people that don't actually want to LEARN a skill, just look like they do.

RRSignal
April 9th, 2012, 10:23 AM
Putting Google Warehouse content on DLS isn't "Public" it is commercial.

Not acknowledging the original creator is "pirating".

Harold

It's well within the confines of permitted redistribution. It's not "piracy."

I do agree, however, that original authors should be credited.

Enzo1
April 9th, 2012, 10:27 AM
Yes I understand google sketchup assets are much higher poly than others.... and yes I do use the 3D warehouse but I have created some random things in it before.... I do know how to use some of the tools in it... I exported exotic sportscars to the game not because I wanted to be a "Content creator" but instead thought there was not enough porshce, ferrari, and lamborghini models in trainz, So I decided I would look in, see what they got, and low and behold, there were more of them than I could find a use for! I thought that maybe you guys would like some sporty cars to put around rich neighborhoods too. But I guess this is not the case? I mean do you frown upon people who wanted exotic cars or any other asset but did not have the time to slap it togeather themselves? Do you frown upon people who do not have all of their time for making assets for the game so YOU can use... What about the content creators? They need time to have fun and play the game also... And thats exactly where google sketchup is great... You can export just about anything you can think of, and use it without bother content creators....

hminky
April 9th, 2012, 10:37 AM
I do agree, however, that original authors should be credited.
Doesn't seem many people have done that. There is stuff on DLS that is from Google Warehouse that is not even identified as Google Warehouse.

Harold

nfitzsimmons
April 9th, 2012, 10:41 AM
I remember back in the day, I bought TrainSim Modeler so I could create custom content that I wanted/needed. Spent an inordinate amount of time learning as I went. Completed a few items and was accused of being untalented and/or lazy for not learning and using GMax instead.

The point is that I had the option to spend 3 months learning to use TSM to create crappy content when I could have spent 2 years learning to create crappy content with GMax. If I see something in the Warehouse I need I'll use it. Or if someone else uploads something I need, I'll use that, too. I'm not proud.

Enzo1
April 9th, 2012, 10:42 AM
Why dont you people stop undermining how we use the game, and we wont always be trying to undermine how you use the game.. The game is made for all people to use. If you do not like people who use the 3D warehouse, than I shall get togeather with them, and we just wont release any more....We will continue to have fun with our games weather you guys have fun or not.... I cannot make the choice on your descision to constantly undermine people who use the game for what they use it for or have fun for you... You have to make that one yourself... I hope you choose to have fun with your game how you use it, instead of worrying about some guy who exported from 3D warehouse becuz he did not have time to make it himself or did not even know how, What ashame people... I am frowning upon those complaining more than you guys are upon people who use it....

cascaderailroad
April 9th, 2012, 10:46 AM
I brought up the thread to bring up a point ... If everthing was created in Sketch Up ... soon your Trainz Game would come to a framerate killing "Standstill".

Enzo1
April 9th, 2012, 10:53 AM
I brought up the thread to bring up a point ... If everthing was created in Sketch Up ... soon your Trainz Game would come to a framerate killing "Standstill".
Then it is your desicison not to use my exotic sportscars then... I do not mind you not using it, plz do not make us people who use sketchup look terrible.. Our intention for the game are not any less than yours, and that is too have fun...

RRSignal
April 9th, 2012, 10:55 AM
I brought up the thread to bring up a point ... If everthing was created in Sketch Up ... soon your Trainz Game would come to a framerate killing "Standstill".

This is true, which is why you have to know what you're doing, and most 3DWH users don't. I did notice in another thread that MSGSapper was listing polycounts, which helps a lot, although that doesn't solve the texture size issue.

Also, another side note: Seems most 3DWH modellers don't add nightmode. That really limits the usability of these models. It's not really that difficult.

Enzo1
April 9th, 2012, 11:03 AM
This is true, which is why you have to know what you're doing, and most 3DWH users don't. I did notice in another thread that MSGSapper was listing polycounts, which helps a lot, although that doesn't solve the texture size issue.

Also, another side note: Seems most 3DWH modellers don't add nightmode. That really limits the usability of these models. It's not really that difficult.
So now I should put night mode in my ferrari's and porsches? I mean you guys need everything perfect, no wonder there are so many payware creators for trainz now.... If I was too busy worrying about how the models on my route dont have night mode, then I would have no fun using the game, but since I am not, I am to busy posting screenshots of my fun while you guys are killing people out of trainz becuz they dont have night mode, they use sketchup, they dont have this that and the other... Why not become unselective? There are so many assets you could use! Best part is, you never know what you can slap togeather when your having fun! Thanks to you guys, there are people who have great screenshots (Greater screenshots than you dream of having becuz your to busy crushing people) that do not post them here... Instead they go somewhere else so they do not worry about having to be crushed by the people who need a perfect game... Go play railworks if you want perfect...

RRSignal
April 9th, 2012, 11:09 AM
So now I should put night mode in my ferrari's and porsches? I mean you guys need everything perfect, no wonder there are so many payware creators for trainz now.... If I was too busy worrying about how the models on my route dont have night mode, then I would have no fun using the game, but since I am not, I am to busy posting screenshots of my fun while you guys are killing people out of trainz becuz they dont have night mode, they use sketchup, they dont have this that and the other... Why not become unselective? There are so many assets you could use! Best part is, you never know what you can slap togeather when your having fun! Thanks to you guys, there are people who have great screenshots (Greater screenshots than you dream of having becuz your to busy crushing people) that do not post them here... Instead they go somewhere else so they do not worry about having to be crushed by the people who need a perfect game... Go play railworks if you want perfect...

Here's a concept - if you're going to do the job, do it right. Imagine that!

NM isn't applicable to everything but it helps make the stuff more usable, especially buildings. And lol if you think railworks is perfect; it's as far as possible from it. You're the one who should be playing it since you like half-a$$ed jobs.

Enzo1
April 9th, 2012, 11:11 AM
Here's a concept - if you're going to do the job, do it right. Imagine that!

NM isn't applicable to everything but it helps make the stuff more usable, especially buildings. And lol if you think railworks is perfect; it's as far as possible from it.
And heres a concept to you: If it is so easy to put nightmode in the buildings, why dont you do it yourself?

RRSignal
April 9th, 2012, 11:12 AM
And heres a concept to you: If it is so easy to put nightmode in the buildings, why dont you do it yourself?

I do. I wouldn't have to though if you did the job right in the first place.

Enzo1
April 9th, 2012, 11:13 AM
I do. It would be easier if folks like you didn't do half-arsed jobs though.

Well if you get any content from, it will always be half-arsed according to you.. For me it is perfect...

RRSignal
April 9th, 2012, 11:15 AM
Well if you get any content from, it will always be half-arsed according to you.. For me it is perfect...

Far from it; many great creators do the job right, whether they make it themselves or get it from 3DWH, myself included. No, it's mostly you.

Enzo1
April 9th, 2012, 11:17 AM
Far from it; many great creators do the job right, whether they make it themselves or get it from 3DWH, myself included. No, it's mostly you.

I have better moral standards then you have... For content, I have some..

leeferr
April 9th, 2012, 11:19 AM
I know that I'll probably get flamed here, but here goes.

I don't have a problem with 3DWH stuff being uploaded to the DLS; however be honest, the DLS lists the uploader as the creator when in fact the uploader did not create the model. The description should at the very least state that the model is from the 3DWH to at least acknowledge that someone other than the uploader actually built the model. This would also be a way of warning the downloader that the content may be of high poly count. Taking a 3DWH model, created by someone else, and adding a config.txt file along with a screenshot is not creating.

Mike

Enzo1
April 9th, 2012, 11:23 AM
I know that I'll probably get flamed here, but here goes.

I don't have a problem with 3DWH stuff being uploaded to the DLS; however be honest, the DLS lists the uploader as the creator when in fact the uploader did not create the model. The description should at the very least state that the model is from the 3DWH to at least acknowledge that someone other than the uploader actually built the model. This would also be a way of warning the downloader that the content may be of high poly count. Taking a 3DWH model, created by someone else, and adding a config.txt file along with a screenshot is not creating.

Mike
I could work with that... I do pay attention to poly count, most of my supercars have 40,000-120,000 polys

RRSignal
April 9th, 2012, 11:42 AM
I have better moral standards then you have... For content, I have some..

Evidently, you have none of either. Besides, you want the internet to be shut down, (http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?84492-SOPA-amp-PIPA-US-Trainzers-could-be-in-trouble/page10) so how can you get and distribute it anyway? Or is this a case of rules that should apply to everyone else except for you?

Pendolino
April 9th, 2012, 11:45 AM
Here's a concept - if you're going to do the job, do it right.

This seems to be a concept absolutely unknown to the "importers". Sketchup models - obviously - are not conceived for use in Trainz; besides unnecessary high poly counts, they often use large numbers of textures.

An object I downloaded - which shall remain unnamed - has 8,000 polys, and uses 65 different textures. According to what stated by WindWalker and other N3V representatives, this amounts to 64x300 = 19,200 extra polys, making it a very inefficient object with a huge impact on FPS. Though I would have liked to add this asset to one of my routes, I deleted it as soon as I saw FRAPS indicating single-digit frame rates.

Nobody prevents a "creator" from modelling (or importing from Google Sketchup, or taking from some Free 3D archive :D) a 55-gal drum with 12,000 polys, no LOD and 32 textures, but this object is a frame killer, and I don't understand why saying so should be considered "snobbish" :D.

Enzo1
April 9th, 2012, 11:54 AM
Evidently, you have none of either. Besides, you want the internet to be shut down, (http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?84492-SOPA-amp-PIPA-US-Trainzers-could-be-in-trouble/page10) so how can you get and distribute it anyway? Or is this a case of rules that should apply to everyone else except for you?

Well I still stand by what I said, if the only way to stop faceless crooks, then it has to be that way... Also people, that way to personally attack me is really getting lame.. He needs to find a new one, oh thats right, he cant. Cuz I do not have many ways too have somebody personally attack me... Its becuz of my moral standards Which means how I conduct myself out here towards others.. Some thing that this guy has none of.. He conducts himself in a quite childish way....

RRSignal
April 9th, 2012, 11:56 AM
Well I still stand by what I said, if the only way to stop faceless crooks, then it has to be that way...

If you want to stop the faceless crooks, they you shouldn't be helping them.

martinvk
April 9th, 2012, 12:25 PM
..., and I don't understand why saying so should be considered "snobbish" :D.The Platters in 1955 summed it up rather well with their hit that went #1 the next year

As for why, well, learning takes too much time and besides, the instant generation wants everything now and wants the accolades too. I guess the concept of earning praise is also so old fashioned.

Nothing wrong with 120,000 poly automobiles if only their "creators" would learn (there's that ugly word again) LOD. Then again, if night-mode is such a hard concept to understand and use, LOD is positively exotic

NIARTcar
April 9th, 2012, 12:43 PM
As a program, sketchup holds quite a bit of potential for trainz. Yes, the exports can be a bit on the bulky side if not properly managed. However, the easy importation into the game along in conjunction with it's interface with google earth makes this program viable for proto route creators. I can not advocate the useage of strictly 3Dwarehouse content for one's uploads, but I cannot say that I am without fault for using it myself; I used a Google made model of "HP Pavillion" hockey arena in San Jose because it was well done and low poly as well (great textures that I could never hope of getting myself). However, I have come to love creating my own assets:


http://i359.photobucket.com/albums/oo35/NIARTcar/NIARTcar_20120129_0000.jpg
http://i359.photobucket.com/albums/oo35/NIARTcar/NIARTcar_20120129_0001.jpg
http://i359.photobucket.com/albums/oo35/NIARTcar/NIARTcar_20120105_0000.jpg

With the exception of the trees, all made in sketchup (still WIP with photo textures and design)

However, as stated before by others, this can be a dangerous tool...


cheers

RRSignal
April 9th, 2012, 01:03 PM
However, as stated before by others, this can be a dangerous tool...

Agreed. I admit when I first saw RubyTMIX released, I was worried about a flood of high-poly and/or crap content. Fortunately, most seems to be decent, and a lot of it is downright incredible. Also, it seems like much of the "high-poly" issue stems from the number of textures, as Pendolino pointed out, not actually the model itself (at least AFAIK.)

wheelsonfire
April 9th, 2012, 01:27 PM
Personally I believe Sketch Up is for lazy people who don't want to learn how to create the real thing in a quality program, at low poly count ... and are taking the "Easy" way out !

That's the biggest load of snobbery I've ever read. Sketchup and Ruby are easy tools to do with whatever you want. I would not countenance using a model from the 3D Warehouse and claiming it as my own but I have found it a very good programme to make simple models, for example curved platforms; tailor-made for my requirements. Simple models have a low poly count. Production of simple models encourages people to get more involved in content creation and then they may decide to get into GMax, 3Ds or Blender.

Knocking the efforts of others (and I'm disregarding the uploaders of other people's work from the 3D Warehouse) only harms us all in the long term. I encourage everyone to have a go at content creation (but don't pretend you're a content creator if you're not).

Pendolino
April 9th, 2012, 02:50 PM
Creating Content for Trainz, whatever software you use, requires compliance with at least some basic requirements, and keeping polys and textures to a minimum is a must, as wheelsonfire stated above. Knocking someone who is working hard to grasp the basics of 3D modelling is stupid, as all of us (except some professional 3D designers) have spent hours - weeks, in my case :D) to understand how to make the legendary "brick box" and exporting it in Trainz.

Converting 3D models designed for other games or purposes into Trainz content almost invariably leads to inefficient Trainz content, because they are not designed to meet the requirements of efficient Trainz content. I admit that this way you can have very efficient framerate killers, though :D.

By the way, if selecting "File|Import" then "File|Export" and writing a config can be called "creating" content, we may look forward to a very concise CCG :D.

captainkman
April 9th, 2012, 03:50 PM
I was reading this long...err...discussion... (?) and have thought about what I do to bring Sketchup models to Trainz. My Matchbox loco was made in Sketchup. Its poly count is only 5234. This is because I imported it to Blender and deleted some extra parts.

Would a tutorial on how to import stuff from Sketchup to Blender be helpful? And if so, would video or a text-with-pictures format be better? I was going to do a video tutorial on how to get a model (a simple house in this case) from Sketchup to Blender, UV map some textures (very simply) and export it to Trainz, but with a pre-written config file.

Kman.

jaleel
April 9th, 2012, 04:00 PM
Let's be honest. Gmax is mad dated, even though it still works. There will come a point when it's not compatible. Blender is super hard for newbies and even some vets. I'm sure it's good but the learning curve is crazy. Enter Sketchup, a relatively easy app to get into, it's not only free but supported on multiple platforms, has tons of learning material, and will be supported going forward by Google.

The OP doesn't seem to understand how much time and energy goes into making content, that seems easy to make. What may seem easy to you is hard for others. Is there a lot of crap out there, oh lord yes, however those same people but time and energy into making it so that you and other can use it and enjoy it. Don't be so quick to down the easy way.

backyard
April 9th, 2012, 06:05 PM
:cool: I am glad someone has told me to watch out for Sketch-up stuff, I have enough high-polys in traincar assets.

It seems to me that the time spent using Sketch-up and configuring Google Warehouse assets could better be used learning Blender or gmax.

PerRock
April 9th, 2012, 08:08 PM
As to the "your being lazy" guys out there. It's not just being lazy. Some of the people who use SketchUp can't figure out the other options. I've gone through every tutorial I can find for both GMAX & Blender; and to this day still can't create much more then an untextured box (I an do a Teapot in GMAX XD ). Don't get me wrong I've tried to learn GMAX & Blender, I have them both install on my system; however I still don't know how to make stuff in them. However I can figure my way around SketchUp fairly well.

If I had it my way I'd have Blender with a SketchUp-like interface. Plain & Simple to understand and use.

peter

RRSignal
April 9th, 2012, 08:11 PM
Actually Blender has one critical "gotcha" which remained totally undocumented until I happened upon a tutorial, I think by Mick Berg. In the Texture window, you have to select, under Mapping, UV instead of "Generated." That's a big caveat that the tutorials don't tell you, even the other Trainz-oriented ones.

martinvk
April 9th, 2012, 10:14 PM
I don't get this "it's so hard" notion and not because I can use GMax to easily made the things i like and want. Every system is hard until you understand how it works and how do you understand - practice, practice and more practice. It also helps if someone can show you the way, point out the gotchas and suggest things to try, either in person or by tutorials. Now the time this takes might vary from months to years or more. Whether it's worth the effort is another matter. If it takes too long to figure out, using other people's objects is perfectly fine too. We all have a finite amount of time and how you use it is your decision.

What I find sad and disapointing is the attitude that using a program to create inferior objects is somehow acceptable. A 120,000 poly car might look gorgeous but it has no business being in an active 3D space like Trainz, at least not with the hardware we have today. As an example to show how exactly the details can be replicated, sure, go for it. But let's not pretend that it would be an acceptable object in Trainz.

amrail2000
April 9th, 2012, 10:53 PM
You know I have spent the last 2 years trying to learn 3d Max. At this time all I can create is a box. Big whoop. I have spent the last 4 years trying to get some one to make the light to medium duty vehicles and trailers seen in every rail yard in the world. I have even offered to pay people to do this. I have the plans for these trucks and trailers yet no one wanted to do it. Then I run across the very thing that I'm looking. And now because I want to export it in to trainz,I'm called lazy? Just what gives you that right. And who are you to call me lazy? I am a route creator, and I'll put my routes up against any one here. All of my routes are done free hand and that includes elevation. The amount of research I put into a route before the first track is put down would have some of you running for the hills.

Also contrary to what I've seen others accused of here, I put in the config file of everything that I have exported so far the name of the content creator. Am I a content creator, not for trainz no. Do I think of my self as one? Not by any means. But to call me lazy is rather uncalled for. When I do upload something that I found in Warehouse,(that is after it's been run through 3d Max), if you don't want to down load it then don't. In fact if all your going to do is complain about it, I would prefer that you don't. This is very reason that 90% of the routes that I create, I keep for my self. It seems that no matter what, all you guys can do is complain about this or that. When I paid 50.00 for each version of trainz that I have, I didn't care if I made you guys happy or not. And to this day I still don't. I got the GAME so I could have FUN. Win lose or draw, that's what I'm going to do. If my approach is not to your liking oh well.

Also let me say, I do FULLY support ENZO1, this guy has been more of a help to more to people that you guys will ever know. He has bent over backwards when all you guys could do is climb all over some one because they didn't word a question correctly or didn't do what you think should be done. Instead of griping how about just sitting back and relaxing and having fun. After all isn't this supposed to be a hobby? Then again, I guess some of you have forgotten what it's like to have fun. As for Enzo1 and my self, we're going to have fun our way. If that's not your way, then oh well.

JCitron
April 9th, 2012, 10:54 PM
I also appreciate a well done high-detail asset, but I rarely saw a bunch of ill-conceived meshes as the ones taken from Google Warehouse: most of these "models" seem to have an inordinate numeber of polys just for the sake of it (400ft buildings made as boxes - 12 polys - with 2 ft chimneys made as 2,000 poly cylinders). LOD, of course is an unspeakably evil practice that should be avoided at all costs :( or - maybe - requires much more skill that simply using a conversion software :D). Last, but not least, textures much too often consist of images taken from Google Maps or Google StreetView: the first are especially awful.

I can only strongly agree with hminky:



Exactly... I would like to see if these wannabe "content creators" are able to make the classic "brick box" :(.

I've seen that too and have done both real models and downloads from Google. With Google downloads, I specifically found buildings that I could have made myself. They're simple mill buildings, but the person that created them got the textures and everything that I couldn't get done.

I have seen traditional models, done in 3d-Studio 4.0 for DOS) that had so many polys that they caused the animation to take 18 hours to complete. This animation was an introduction to some plastic training videos. There was some text and titles, which zinged in really quickly. The factory builing, done in AutoCad, zinged in rather quickly. Usually ACad files dork because of the number of faces, but this model was pretty well optimized. Anyway. The video gets to the room full of machines. This is where everything came to a dead stop. There were 12 machines running in the room with all of them producing the same green cup. In reality there was only one machine, but the rest were instance objects. These are like the trees we have on a route. There was originally only one of them placed, but the rest are rendered in memory based on the single tree.

We searched all over the place. Deleted the building, rebuilt the building, redid the intro, removed the cup, etc., all to no avail. Finally as a last resort, we pulled the injection molding machine from the scene. BINGO! We won the lottery here. There were no longer stutters and freezes. The machine model needed to be optimized. The video creator, who also was a modeler but was given this model to use, went through the model piece-by-piece. The culprit turned out to be the feet. There were six hexogonal-shaped feet on the machine. Each foot had 256,000 faces on it. No wonder the video stalled. Once the feet were reduced substantially, everything was pretty smooth.

So yes high poly models can come from any source.

The inherent issue though with Sketch-up models is there are so many texture bits. With Trainz, this is actually the performance killer. The large mesh gets loaded into memory no problem, but the little bits of textures get loaded individually. This causes Trainz to have to load up each texture piece into memory from the disk instead of loading up one master texture with UV mapping plains point to the mesh from the master texture sheet.

To better explain this, it's like using tiny decals with glue and tape on a gift instead of one piece of wrapping paper. Which gets done faster, or in the case of the 3d models, which loads faster?

John

BobCass
April 9th, 2012, 11:08 PM
martinvk: What I find Disappointing and sad is hear you say inferior product??Are you refering that Sketch 8 is an inferior product??I have news for you..It has been used in movie industry for several years now..It has been used by many,many Architects..I wouldn't call that inferior..http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab163/bobcass/9000-C-2.jpg

captainkman
April 9th, 2012, 11:21 PM
Following from JCitron's post, if people can get the model from Sketchup to Blender and UV map it, then there is no problem with textures. And that is in fact exactly what can be done! It is in fact what I did for my Matchbox loco. I made it in Sketchup, imported it into Blender, (VERY simple!) and textured it there (UV Mapping), plus added attachments, and exported it to a new asset folder, where a pre-written config was waiting.

I can easily do a tutorial on getting a model from Sketchup to Trainz, including the Blender stages of texturing. The tutorial here was very helpful to me, and I can do a video version of it. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Trainz/Tutorial_for_Blender#Textures

Kieran.

Enzo1
April 9th, 2012, 11:24 PM
You know I have spent the last 2 years trying to learn 3d Max. At this time all I can create is a box. Big whoop. I have spent the last 4 years trying to get some one to make the light to medium duty vehicles and trailers seen in every rail yard in the world. I have even offered to pay people to do this. I have the plans for these trucks and trailers yet no one wanted to do it. Then I run across the very thing that I'm looking. And now because I want to export it in to trainz,I'm called lazy? Just what gives you that right. And who are you to call me lazy? I am a route creator, and I'll put my routes up against any one here. All of my routes are done free hand and that includes elevation. The amount of research I put into a route before the first track is put down would have some of you running for the hills.

Also contrary to what I've seen others accused of here, I put in the config file of everything that I have exported so far the name of the content creator. Am I a content creator, not for trainz no. Do I think of my self as one? Not by any means. But to call me lazy is rather uncalled for. When I do upload something that I found in Warehouse,(that is after it's been run through 3d Max), if you don't want to down load it then don't. In fact if all your going to do is complain about it, I would prefer that you don't. This is very reason that 90% of the routes that I create, I keep for my self. It seems that no matter what, all you guys can do is complain about this or that. When I paid 50.00 for each version of trainz that I have, I didn't care if I made you guys happy or not. And to this day I still don't. I got the GAME so I could have FUN. Win lose or draw, that's what I'm going to do. If my approach is not to your liking oh well.

Also let me say, I do FULLY support ENZO1, this guy has been more of a help to more to people that you guys will ever know. He has bent over backwards when all you guys could do is climb all over some one because they didn't word a question correctly or didn't do what you think should be done. Instead of griping how about just sitting back and relaxing and having fun. After all isn't this supposed to be a hobby? Then again, I guess some of you have forgotten what it's like to have fun. As for Enzo1 and my self, we're going to have fun our way. If that's not your way, then oh well.

More to RRSignals: I am an Admin at that site not becuz of my taste in content, but becuz I do more to help people, I do not crush them becuz they cannot do this that or the other, but instead try to help them!

leeferr
April 10th, 2012, 12:10 AM
Wow....this is starting to get out of hand.

H222
April 10th, 2012, 01:20 AM
Woah - this thread has gone from Sketchup, to 3D Warehouse, to Piracy, to Morals, to SOPA/PIPA, to Monorails, to snobbery.

What a read, and all in less than 24 hours?

Jamie

NIARTcar
April 10th, 2012, 02:01 AM
Honestly, what else would one expect here? The original post consists of the following content:

Seems that a rash of super High Poly assets are being created using Sketch Up.
Observation


These Super High Poly assets can adversely effect framerates in Trainz.
Fact


Personally I believe Sketch Up is for lazy people who don't want to learn how to create the real thing in a quality program, at low poly count ... and are taking the "Easy" way out !
Attack on another group

The OP just screams of conflict, there is no attempt to reconcile the issue past blowing a whistle and calling people a few names. Really all this is is a thread created to provoke hostility from the community from both sides.....

Mission success!

RRSignal
April 10th, 2012, 07:30 AM
More to RRSignals: I am an Admin at that site not becuz of my taste in content, but becuz I do more to help people, I do not crush them becuz they cannot do this that or the other, but instead try to help them!

Likewise, I do a great amount to help people at this site, as do most regulars here. I don't crush them because (<-that's a real word) they cannot do this that or the other. In fact, if you haven't noticed, I've been supportive of the notion of using Sketchup, even though I'm a Blender man myself.

H222
April 10th, 2012, 08:40 AM
using something properly works, something that makes hassles and arguements, not so much

Jamie

angelah
April 10th, 2012, 08:47 AM
I am a GMax person, as you all know, but if polys can be kept down in Sketchup then why not use it. Both GMax and Blender are not the easiest of progs to learn, it takes a lot of time, time that many people have not got and both can be very frustrating.
The real art in any creation package is texturing and I spend most of the time involved with any single asset on graphics, getting it as right as I can in a triple whammy of Gimp, Paint and PaintShoPro. Once I have textures right in these they are (now) put into texture maps. I have gone over to this apart from some textures needed for large areas such as bricks, tiles or cladding. One other texture I use outside of the map is anything that will be alpha channeled.
So if somebody cannot learn GMax/Blender for whatever reason I won't knock them, they are hard to get the hang of. If they can create something in Sketchup that will work in versions of Trainz without bringing it to its knees then fair enough. We all had to learn so why bash somebody who is trying?
I did look at Sketchup after downloading it because it seemed easier to use, which it probably is, but it may well have limitations and as I was happy with GMax it didn't really matter. Fine if a person works within those Sketchup limitations, I have no problem with that either.

Angela

Enzo1
April 10th, 2012, 08:47 AM
Likewise, I do a great amount to help people at this site, as do most regulars here. I don't crush them because (<-that's a real word) they cannot do this that or the other. In fact, if you haven't noticed, I've been supportive of the notion of using Sketchup, even though I'm a Blender man myself.
Woa woa woa, All I see here all the time is you crushing people..... And I see myself taking the time to help others out and neglect my Trainz projects... Its a freaking game for goodness sakes! Its a hobby! Its not about who has better content! Its about who can have the fun! So If you ever go to SAXT, I am an Admin there and will outrank you... First time I see you crushing somebody there, Its a no-no... I got my supercars, I got people who love them, I got people who want to have the fun with the game, and not just see what no-fun they can create by going around and crushing people who apparently think they are heroes because they use GMAX and Blender, Wow good for you.... I make routes, and I post pics of it, but you wont get it, it has NON-DLS content on it, If anybody is Lazy around here, Its you...

H222
April 10th, 2012, 08:53 AM
I am an Admin there and will outrank you

Woah - I like your supercars, but really? you're an admin, wow... I don't care if you are

Jamie

Enzo1
April 10th, 2012, 08:59 AM
Woah - I like your supercars, but really? you're an admin, wow... I don't care if you are

Jamie

Yep, if you go to SAXT, you step out of line, I am right there to put your rear end back in it
Also to RRSignals disgrace, I got more supercars coming...

RRSignal
April 10th, 2012, 09:17 AM
Woa woa woa, All I see here all the time is you crushing people..... And I see myself taking the time to help others out and neglect my Trainz projects... Its a freaking game for goodness sakes! Its a hobby! Its not about who has better content! Its about who can have the fun! So If you ever go to SAXT, I am an Admin there and will outrank you... First time I see you crushing somebody there, Its a no-no... I got my supercars, I got people who love them, I got people who want to have the fun with the game, and not just see what no-fun they can create by going around and crushing people who apparently think they are heroes because they use GMAX and Blender, Wow good for you.... I make routes, and I post pics of it, but you wont get it, it has NON-DLS content on it, If anybody is Lazy around here, Its you...

Wow, the pot calls the kettle - your "supercars" are some of the highest-poly assets available, especially that you're exporting small scenery assets. And you didn't do jack other than download them off of 3DWH and run them through an exporter. Talk about lazy. Hey, maybe I should make 50k poly lamp posts...

As far as criticism, sure, I'll criticize epic, record-breaking idiotic statements like yours that the internet should be shut down, all while you post and utilize this awful internet to its fullest extent. I don't dispute that I don't have much tolerance for hypocrisy and idiocy.

And, if I see assets that could be made more useful, I'll make suggestions - take them or leave them, rather than flip out and throw a hissy fit. I just won't use them, as probably will very many other people. Keep in mind, one of the cool things about 3DWarehouse is that I could download and export them myself, and add nightmode or whatever else I want, if I cared that much.

And, while I hate to rain on your little power trip, but I haven't been to SAXRT in months. I think I've only been to it once or twice. But, thank you for making it known that it's full of half-arsed 3DWH exports that'll crush people's framerates and power-tripping admins. You've done a better job at dissuading people from visiting than I ever could have. http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i71/rally510/thumbsup.jpg lol!

boleyd
April 10th, 2012, 10:50 AM
One productive thing came out of this morass - I saw that Sketchup may be easy to use and worth a try for someone like me who may want to TRY to make something and have it appear in Trainz. I really do not care about credits or titles. All I want is well detailed AND (this is a must) well textured models. I really find it odd that some assets that appear are very good but look like circus objects with bright single colors on them. Why spend all the time making a great model and then slap on a coat of cheap paint.

BLACKWATCH
April 10th, 2012, 10:55 AM
There is an answer to this argument over 'Sketchup' & poly count, one of our number
is willing to help with advise on the matter, give them a look .............
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?87764-Would-This-Be-Useful-To-Anyone

PerRock
April 10th, 2012, 12:42 PM
You know I have spent the last 2 years trying to learn 3d Max. At this time all I can create is a box. Big whoop. I have spent the last 4 years trying to get some one to make the light to medium duty vehicles and trailers seen in every rail yard in the world. I have even offered to pay people to do this. I have the plans for these trucks and trailers yet no one wanted to do it. Then I run across the very thing that I'm looking. And now because I want to export it in to trainz,I'm called lazy? Just what gives you that right. And who are you to call me lazy? I am a route creator, and I'll put my routes up against any one here. All of my routes are done free hand and that includes elevation. The amount of research I put into a route before the first track is put down would have some of you running for the hills.

Also contrary to what I've seen others accused of here, I put in the config file of everything that I have exported so far the name of the content creator. Am I a content creator, not for trainz no. Do I think of my self as one? Not by any means. But to call me lazy is rather uncalled for. When I do upload something that I found in Warehouse,(that is after it's been run through 3d Max), if you don't want to down load it then don't. In fact if all your going to do is complain about it, I would prefer that you don't. This is very reason that 90% of the routes that I create, I keep for my self. It seems that no matter what, all you guys can do is complain about this or that. When I paid 50.00 for each version of trainz that I have, I didn't care if I made you guys happy or not. And to this day I still don't. I got the GAME so I could have FUN. Win lose or draw, that's what I'm going to do. If my approach is not to your liking oh well.

Also let me say, I do FULLY support ENZO1, this guy has been more of a help to more to people that you guys will ever know. He has bent over backwards when all you guys could do is climb all over some one because they didn't word a question correctly or didn't do what you think should be done. Instead of griping how about just sitting back and relaxing and having fun. After all isn't this supposed to be a hobby? Then again, I guess some of you have forgotten what it's like to have fun. As for Enzo1 and my self, we're going to have fun our way. If that's not your way, then oh well.

+1

(10 Characters)

BLACKWATCH
April 10th, 2012, 01:08 PM
So perRock, is that +1 for, or +1 against having a rant ?

You don't specify, so thought I'd ask, due to the fact that I got critisized for making a remark
that was classed as lazy because it was a shortened version of the original English saying and
those of a Yank persuasion didn't understand. :hehe:

Retro00064
April 10th, 2012, 01:52 PM
This thread seems to be going downhill.


Woa woa woa, All I see here all the time is you crushing people.....

RRSignal is a helpful member of the community. I have seen many helpful posts by him with my own eyes. Your argument that he only crushes people here is wrong and without evidence.


So If you ever go to SAXT, I am an Admin there and will outrank you... <snip>

Wow, really? Being an admin or moderator is not about being better or more important than other members, regardless of whether the forum software is set up to put more stars or some flashy icon below your username. It's about being able to contribute to the smooth operation of the forum by having the tools to do som, such as by being able to remove disruptive posts and personal attacks and warning or blocking members if necessary to prevent further disruption, etc.

Being an admin or moderator takes a great degree of trust from those who have entrusted you with the tools, because the moderation tools (and especially the administrator tools) are very dangerous to the forum if in the wrong hands.

Back on topic:

Some people who use Sketchup may simply not know any better about the polygon issue, etc. Let's recommend and educate to them how to use Sketchup for Trainz properly. Call it constructive criticism if you want. Let's not put them down. There are, of course, some people who unfortunately will not accept even constructive criticism, however. As has been said, some people have even tried to learn the other modeling programs and have failed. If they should be using one of the other programs, then why not help them learn another program, walking them through it, teaching them, rather than just stating that they should use another program and leaving it up to them to do it when some of them have tried themselves and failed.

Regarding the conversion of Google 3D Warehouse models for Trainz and uploading them without credit to the original creator, in this case it is not copyright infringement, as far as I know, but it is plagiarism. Reusing a public-domain work without credit to the original creator is plagiarism, even though it is legal. So yes, ethically, people should credit the original creators of the 3D Warehouse models that they convert and upload for Trainz. If ModelerMJ, the creator of the RubyTMIX Sketchup exporter for Trainz, has not already done so (I don't know; I don't have neither Sketchup nor RubyTMIX), the perhaps he could include a notice in the program or in its installer or license that tells people to credit the original creators of any 3D Warehouse models that they convert and upload for Trainz.

Regards,

Zachary.

PerRock
April 10th, 2012, 02:36 PM
So perRock, is that +1 for, or +1 against having a rant ?

You don't specify, so thought I'd ask, due to the fact that I got critisized for making a remark
that was classed as lazy because it was a shortened version of the original English saying and
those of a Yank persuasion didn't understand. :hehe:

+1 usually indicates that you like whatever it is. So in this case I like what he said. If it were against something it'd probably be a -1; however you don't really see that, instead people actually voice their criticism. +1 says "I like what you said & don't really have anything else to add to it."

peter

PS; I didn't think I'd have to explain regularly used internet terms here..

BLACKWATCH
April 10th, 2012, 03:26 PM
PS; I didn't think I'd have to explain regularly used internet terms here..

Neither did I when I got pulled up for my remark, but heyho.

My previous post was just an attempt to bring some lightness back
to the thread, as it seemed to be getting a bit heavy, (hence the smilie).

nikos1
April 10th, 2012, 05:20 PM
If you've ever tried to build a realistic prototype use, the sketchup exporter and the 3D library are an absolute godsend. The models may be high poly but if it saves me the time of having to build 30 buildings from scratch, I'm all for it.
If you don't like it don't use it, personally I think most decently up to date computers can handle these models, the OP is someone that still insists MP chunky mesh track is the best so I think his opinion is pretty inconsequential.

sparky15
April 10th, 2012, 06:18 PM
It's your race, run it how you want. Want to use Sketchup and the Warehouse, go for it. It is you, after all, amusing yourself with a hobby. I'm no content creator but build my little dog and pony routes for for my amusement, no other reason. I have zero desire to put them up to be scrutinized by self appointed content police who think I should build them for their greater good. The time I spend is for my amusement, no other reason.*
The one little route I did release over at TPR, I got e-mails ranging from "send me all the content you used" to "why didn't you do this". Enough for me. This expectation of a few who feel empowered enough to decide what should be made is a joke at best. All you're doing is giving people who may build content a reason not to release because you have no problem dictating what that content should be by your standards.
If people using Sketchup cheeses you off that bad, don't use that content. Simple as that. Not hard to do but you act like every piece of content is a life altering event. To think everyone should jump through hoops to give you what you decide should be is laughable at best. If you want to assume some authority over content or feel if it wasn't for you, the whole enchilada would collapse, good luck with that.*
The rest of us are having fun with what we like. You can revel in your self importance if you wish.*
Why don't I release my routes? I use Trainz to build all the model railroads that catch my eye, that is where my interest is. A thread here decided to use general consensus to decide those types of routes aren't worth it. The one at TPR is under this user name, the last screenshots I posted are at USLW under Sparky, if they're still there.
For all the Sketchup users, press on with pride and enjoy yourself. Don't let the few here that believe they dictate what you do discourage you.

Dave..........

cascaderailroad
April 10th, 2012, 06:25 PM
MP Track (Chunky Mesh) does curve superiorly, as opposed to high poly track http://i525.photobucket.com/albums/cc339/cascaderailroad/Screen_005-3.jpg ... and as for this loco (which is not a Sketch Up loco) is so high poly that when it comes into view the framerates drop from the normal 40 FPS, to 7 FPS http://i525.photobucket.com/albums/cc339/cascaderailroad/PRR3.jpg

Go ahead, and load up your route with 200,000 poly Sketch Up assets ... pretty soon your game framerates wil be in the single digits !

Why not just learn the right way to create a 3D asset ... instead of taking the "Easy Way Out" !

Oh ... That's right GMax & Blender are too complex of a learning curve ... for the lazy !http://cache0.bookdepository.co.uk/assets/images/book/medium/9780/7645/9780764587894.jpg (http://cache0.bookdepository.co.uk/assets/images/book/medium/9780/7645/9780764587894.jpg)


I suppose that if you worked for GM or GE, and were in CAD/CAM deptartment ... you would be instead taking the easy way out, using Sketch Up ?

http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1166890448l/18248.jpg
or http://erinreads.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/War-and-Peace-Book.jpg

NIARTcar
April 10th, 2012, 06:41 PM
@ cascaderailroad Really? Who is to say that way is the correct way? Perhaps it may be the first and, until now, the most predominant method, but with the validity of sketchup now seeming plausable it would appear that there are more options. I remember the creator of this plugin for sketchup making a remark that he would be looking into effcient mapping in future plugin developements, and I honestly can see this happening. As for your posts, I find it in rather poor taste that every point made is followed with almost imediately by an attack. That is no way to make an argument and if you want a constructive topic on the subject, that is not a way to create one. It sets the tone for the rest of the thread to be nothing more but a flame war.

nikos1
April 10th, 2012, 06:46 PM
Do you even know how to 3D model? I've never seen a single screenshot of yours showing that you can, the only content that you seem capable of creating are crappy paintshed PRR reskins. I know to use 3DS Max but if a building is available on the 3D library that I need, im going to use it. Your comment about working for GM/GE is retarded, theres a HUGE difference between a train game and a full time 3d modeling job, get real.
If your computer can't handle the RRMods SD45's then your running a seriously outdated computer, I can run two of them, high detail track (Have you ever used the JR track? Curves just as well as your beloved MP track and looks alot better) and a 50 car train of JR high detail stack cars and still get a playable frame rate. Just because your crappy old computer cant handle high poly objects doesn't mean everyone should cater to your needs.

cascaderailroad
April 10th, 2012, 06:57 PM
All I am saying is: Sketch Up in Trainz is one giant leap backward, and sideways downhill, in technology for Trainz ... go for a job interview with Pixar ... and tell them you actually prefer Sketch Up. :hehe:

sparky15
April 10th, 2012, 07:06 PM
Google up a Pixar application. They state you will be trained on their proprietary software.

nikos1
April 10th, 2012, 07:18 PM
All I am saying is: Sketch Up in Trainz is one giant leap backward, and sideways downhill, in technology for Trainz ... go for a job interview with Pixar ... and tell them you actually prefer Sketch Up. :hehe:

So Trainz is on the same level as multimillion dollar movie productions? FAIL
I prefer 3DS but as I said earlier if there is a readymade asset for sketchup I will use it. Also why are you telling people to use antiquated unsupported software like GMAX? Atleast sketchup is still a actively updated program.

Oh and why are you concerned about a leap backwards? Arn't you one of those people who are still using TRS2006?

clam1952
April 10th, 2012, 07:18 PM
All I am saying is: Sketch Up in Trainz is one giant leap backward, and sideways downhill, in technology for Trainz ... go for a job interview with Pixar ... and tell them you actually prefer Sketch Up. :hehe:

Better do some research before bursting forth into print,

I'm not overfond of Sketchup however see here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mkPRmqUlFw I suppose they are lazy as well?

cascaderailroad
April 10th, 2012, 07:33 PM
As long as assets are Low Poly, I can say nothing against it ... but when the DLS becomes absolutely flooded with extremely Super High Poly assets, that would be the downfall of Trainz.

captainkman
April 10th, 2012, 07:37 PM
As long as assets are Low Poly, I can say nothing against it ... but when the DLS becomes absolutely flooded with extremely Super High Poly assets, that would be the downfall of Trainz.

Well, take a look at this idea which can help people reduce their model's poly count, and lean some Blender skills too, like rotating, sizing a mesh and texuring:
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?87764-Would-This-Be-Useful-To-Anyone&p=970805#post970805

I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.

Beattie
April 10th, 2012, 07:48 PM
My answer about it:hehe:. http://bit.ly/wsTOEa

Retro00064
April 10th, 2012, 08:55 PM
<snip> Also why are you telling people to use antiquated unsupported software like GMAX? Atleast sketchup is still a actively updated program.

<snip>

GMax still works good for me and does what I need. I don't care if it's old and unsupported by its maker. You can install PEV's GMax exporter and do things that you can't do with the old Auran exporter, such as adding normal mapping or specular effects.

@cascaderailroad: Another good track to try would be USLW's 132-pound track. It's what I currently use.

Regards,

Zachary.

RRSignal
April 10th, 2012, 09:29 PM
Agreed. I don't knock GMax because it's more than useful for Trainz' purposes; probably the vast majority of content for Trainz was produced in it (if past popularity inferences were any indication.) It's not obsolete by any means. Trainz really doesn't need all the bells and whistles of Blender (and, maybe, 3DS) beyond basic object creation and animation. Indeed, if anything - and I'm basing this mostly on reviews I've read by others - GMax offers a kind of medium between the advanced capabilities of Blender and the easier-to-use interface of Sketchup. Perhaps someone who has used both Blender and GMax, or maybe all three, can provide better insight. I went with Blender because I wanted to be ready to take advantage of Blender's capabilities (and, probably more importantly, I fell in love with the keyboard shortcuts. Hey- I'm a keyboard-junkie and shortcut-lovin' DOS whore!) of Blender but only because it was my thing. I also like that Blender is still in support, but so is Sketchup and 3DS; that doesn't render GMax unsuitable for Trainz as we know it.

leeferr
April 10th, 2012, 09:33 PM
I think it's time for me to pop some corn and grab a six pack.
Mike

arraial
April 10th, 2012, 09:36 PM
.......dont worry..... dont worry be HAPPY so... ....... The great Bob Marley :wave:
arraial

steve123
April 10th, 2012, 09:46 PM
The simple fact is if you don't want any of Google Sketchup assets then don't download them, it is as simple as that, the only result then will be your loss of haviing that asset, and if your computer is that poor tht it can not play high poly assets then do something about it, Sydney Harbour Bridge building with sketchup continues without the help of anybodies asset from anywhere including Google Sketchup Library.
I would like to thank {ModelerMJ} for all his work with the creation of Ruby TMIX program that allows us to export our new assets to Trainz, you have made so many people happier and far more active within Trainz to which can only be a benift to all at the end of the day.T
hank you very much

,http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/2185/steve123201204110001.jpg (http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/2185/steve123201204110001.jpg)
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1189/steve123201204110000.jpg
steve

Gandalf0444
April 10th, 2012, 10:12 PM
It simply amazes me how much people complain over nothing. I have used Google Warehouse for buildings why? It is simple. I have been trying to learn Gcrapx as well as 3dsmax....I have read dozens of tutorials and watched hours upon hours upon hours of video tutorials, but I still cannot wrap my head around it. I can follow the tutorials obviously as they are a step by step process, but outside of that I do not have a clue in hell...I can make a box, or a tea pot much like Perrock..... If you don't like the high poly models from google warehouse TOUGH don't download it period the end.
As for me I have populated New York City with over 65 buildings that are VERY high poly, along with high poly track from JR, along with about 700 splines(roads,platforms etc etc) and I get about 50 fps with all of that on screen at once....If your computer cannot stand up to a higher poly building...then well don't download it, or it maybe time for an upgrade(funds permitting).

The things people complain about boggles my mind...it is a waste of time...Much like the state government here in CT saving us 1 penny at the gas pump...a waste of time money and effort to come to that conclusion...

If you have a problem with it put your big boy panties on and put your blinders on and DON'T LOOK AT IT and DON'T download it...Simple. If it will bring your computer to it's knees, make it catch fire then beg for mercy, don't use it or don't download it. Simple.

RRSignal
April 10th, 2012, 10:25 PM
like the high poly models from google warehouse TOUGH don't download it period the end.

...

If you have a problem with it put your big boy panties on and put your blinders on and DON'T LOOK AT IT and DON'T download it...Simple. If it will bring your computer to it's knees, make it catch fire then beg for mercy, don't use it or don't download it. Simple.

Agreed 100% in principle, but the problem is, content imported into Trainz doesn't give you a clue as to polycount, let alone a size-to-poly ratio. A 40k poly skyscraper is not big deal; a little, tiny 40k poly car parked in front of a Trainz building becomes quite another deal, and exponentially more so when one populates the lot with them.

martinvk
April 10th, 2012, 10:29 PM
Anyone remember the dark ages of computer programing when memory was counted in bits and no effort was too great to reduce code size? Then as memory became cheaper and everyone wanted to write code Assembler and other low level languages were ignored by the new generation. Easy of use was the new mantra and so what if the code was bloated, just add more memory and faster CPUs. Of coarse it didn't last, no amount of hardware could compensate for really inefficient coding. People became tired of waiting while the computer struggling to execute the the programs that were badly made. Now everyone wants snappy performance. Wait for more than a few seconds for a webpage to load and people move on. If the next tablet doesn't work fast enough, it risks serious market share loss.

To a small extent I see the same thing here. The early models had to be so optimum because there was not extra power available to display them. Those that could shave off extra polys without affecting the look were idolized. If the next version of an object had fewer polys, it was praised to no end. Better hardware has allowed to poly limits to be relaxed. New easier to use software allows more people to contribute. This is all a good thing.

If some of the latest objects are rather poly rich, that's just a consequence of the same phenomena that coding went through. One or two super high ploy objects might work but even the best computers will be brought to their knees by dozens or hundreds. I think eventually when the software tools are better understood and mastered, minimizing render times and efficiency will once again be in style.

Meanwhile, as has been said, if it's too much for your computer, let it pass for now. I'm pretty sure when lower poly versions are produced, the market place will sort it out rather quickly. And if your favorite item is never made in a lower poly edition? . No one else seems to notice so you can do without or make it yourself.

steve123
April 10th, 2012, 10:37 PM
People still have the option to delete it after they have downloaded it , i can tell you right now that the Sydney Harbour Bridge poly count is around 151,000 before it is complete and my computer has no trouble at all.
steve

JCitron
April 10th, 2012, 10:39 PM
Thank you, CaptainKman for your tutorial link. I'll have to check that out when I get a chance. Right now my mental bandwidth is a bit tight on processing space. :)

I wish there were like and unlike buttons in this forum. I agree with so much was said here as well as not, it would be like to voice an agreement without responding to every post I agree with.

Zachary. I agree a 40k poly building is nothing, but a 40k car is. This is similar to the situation I had with the injection molding animation. The 6 or 8 feet on the machine with 256,000 polys on each foot is exactly the same scenario. Back then, as Martin pointed out, we had to optimize everything to render quickly on the '486s and P-90 that we had on our render farm back then in 1995-96.

John

leeferr
April 10th, 2012, 10:54 PM
I don't blame anyone for wanting to create and to use the easiest program available to do that. I too find Gmax rather cumbersome and Blender is totally baffling to me. That's why I use a CAD program that I'm familiar with to create meshes, convert to a dxf and then import to Gmax for texturing and animation. It simply works for me. It took me awhile to understand that I could manipulate the number of polys created when I converted my CAD mesh to .dxf before importing to Gmax. It's all a learning process. I tend to create some high poly content, but that's by choice because I just simply like the detail. LOD can take care of a lot of that, but I haven't made much use of it yet as I'm still a novice at it, but I'm learning. I'm also learning the advantages of minimizing the number of textures. As I said, it's all a learning process, and not an easy one at that.

If sketchup models and 3DWH imports are high poly, so be it. If your machine can handle them, more power to you. If it can't, you just need to stay away from them. Realize though, if you're using high poly content in a route that's intended to be uploaded to the DLS, then the market for downloads and actual usage of the route may depend on the capabilities of the downloader's machine and thus you may derive a reputation in route building based on this, whether good or bad. That's your choice.

My real pet peaves...and they're just mine...are

1) uploaders of 3DWH content should state in the description that it's 3DWH content and not the uploader's original creation. Due respect to the actual creator.

2) It would be really helpful if N3V had a poly count and number of textures listing for the content so that I had some idea before I downloaded. I don't really care to waste my time downloading something that I know is going to bring my machine to its knees, especially if I place several of them.

3) Better still...if N3V could come up with some kind of grading system that would give me an indication of the content's resource requirements.

I realize fully that none of the above are likely to be implemented, but I can dream can't I

Now that the commercial is over, back to the show.

Mike

JCitron
April 10th, 2012, 11:13 PM
Mike,

The config.txt file created by the RubyMX 3DWH/Sketchup exporter will place a tagline in the description stating that this is orginally a Sketchup model. I suppose the person uploading, and I'm guilty of this as well, should note the original author and include that in the description even if it means editing the config.txt at in the end.

I too find Gmax and even the original 3ds Max to be very cumbersome. Their older 3ds 4.0 for DOS had a much more intuitive interface although quite dated. If they had taken the interface from the DOS version and implemented that in the Windows-based Max, then this would have been a really nice product. I actually had a chance to use Max 1.0 just before it was released. A friend of mine worked as a freelance writer Autodesk and wrote one of the Master's series books. She compiled her copy on my computer, my brother output the films, and I did some editing and proofing. It was an awesome experience that I'll never forget.

I too have yet though to get into Blender. I have it, took a quick look at it and instantly became tired. It's typical of many open source applications. There are too many options and key strokes for the functions - not that they're not needed. It's the intereface and organization that's confusing.

I agree we have to be careful what we place in our scenes since N3V does not include a poly meter. It would be nice if there was a scene or camera view poly counter that would change color from green to red if the polylimit is too high for the hardware. So if on my own fast computer my scene counter turns red, then this definitely cause problems on lesser hardware.

John

leeferr
April 10th, 2012, 11:16 PM
Mike,

The config.txt file created by the RubyMX 3DWH/Sketchup exporter will place a tagline in the description stating that this is orginally a Sketchup model. I suppose the person uploading, and I'm guilty of this as well, should note the original author and include that in the description even if it means editing the config.txt at in the end.

I too find Gmax and even the original 3ds Max to be very cumbersome. Their older 3ds 4.0 for DOS had a much more intuitive interface although quite dated. If they had taken the interface from the DOS version and implemented that in the Windows-based Max, then this would have been a really nice product. I actually had a chance to use Max 1.0 just before it was released. A friend of mine worked as a freelance writer Autodesk and wrote one of the Master's series books. She compiled her copy on my computer, my brother output the films, and I did some editing and proofing. It was an awesome experience that I'll never forget.

I too have yet though to get into Blender. I have it, took a quick look at it and instantly became tired. It's typical of many open source applications. There are too many options and key strokes for the functions - not that they're not needed. It's the intereface and organization that's confusing.

I agree we have to be careful what we place in our scenes since N3V does not include a poly meter. It would be nice if there was a scene or camera view poly counter that would change color from green to red if the polylimit is too high for the hardware. So if on my own fast computer my scene counter turns red, then this definitely cause problems on lesser hardware.

John

Finally, a voice of reason. If we could just concentrate on how we can better use the tools available to us and not so much on attacking each other, we might actually get somewhere.

Mike

Pendolino
April 11th, 2012, 04:47 AM
The poly meter has been requested several times, but so far the closest thing we have are the performance statistics which are not too much useful: they state what the "heaviest" object is (track or some other spline, usually), but the rest of the data is meaningless to most of us (myself first :D).

I made a very crude "tool" for measuring the impact of downloaded content, placing multiple copies (1,296) of an object 20 meters apart on a single baseboard and measuring the frame rate with FRAPS as a single SD-40 travels along a track in the middle of the board. Using the "replace asset" tool, this provides me with a rough indication of the relative "weight" of new content: some days ago I used it to compare a new revised version of a building of mine (1,200 poly at LOD1, 3 LODs, one single texture) with the older one I made 10 years ago (5,400 poly, no LOD, 12 textures). Frame rate was in the high 60s, against low 10s for the older versions. Efficient design seems to have some effect on performance, after all.

I don't think the software you use is as important as careful design of an object: you can easily make an awful 75,000 trash can with 3DS Max or turn out a nice, efficient, properly textured model with Sketchup. Most content coming from the Warehouse (or from other sources of free 3D models) is utterly inefficient. It can come handy to turn Trainz into a PowerPoint slideshow :D.

chrisaw
April 11th, 2012, 05:04 AM
If you make a model in gmax with the default settings, you'll end up with a poly heavy asset. It isn't the modelling programme that's the problem, it's neglecting the modelling guidelines as published in the CCG's and Wiki.

One thing I can't find, although I'm sure it came up in another thread, is the max polys that can be rendered in one scene.

Chris.

conrail_3004
April 11th, 2012, 06:35 AM
I use it and i have not down loaded anything up to the black pages just becouse i dont know about the rules of it, but i dont know how to use gmax or bender, i tryed i wanted to strat building peterbuilt fords chevy kenworth mack you know the stuff we are lacking in the trainz world and when i learned about this i was going crazy download. I to want to think mike for making this program, my layout now has the vehicles that are much need

paulzmay
April 11th, 2012, 07:48 AM
Well, that went well... I don't think anyone has benefitted much from this thread at all - just thrown a lot of insults around, which doesn't really help anyone...

I wasn't going to bite, but I've held my toungue about as long as I could...

The problem with Sketchup is ultimately that it's actually quite hard to create objects in a way that is efficient, and easy to create objects that are high in poly count and texture count, relative to their appearance in-game. In other words, for a piece of content with an identical appearance, the SketchUp version will almost always be less efficient unless the creator is very cunning. Unfortunately, this rarely applies to 3DWH creators. Also, some creators who use SU becasue it is easier than GMax, may well not be prepared to embrace these somewhat trickier optimisation techniques (google ''SketchUp poly count'').

Of course, those with super computers might not mind that it takes all their systems resources to render a scene with just a handful of these objects in it, but consider what happens if a route is created, either for the DLS, or for a new Trainz release that includes a substantial number of these assets. Those running machines near the minimum specs for Trainz are going to see a slideshow (at best), and will probably blame the program, rather than the specific content.

Personally I download some of the SketchUp conversions, and test them on a blank board with the performance stats running. The majority get deleted, either because they are actually quite poor models, or because they have a texture count that is well into double figures (sometimes over 50). The remainder I keep because they provide something not available elsewhere, and I use them VERY sparingly.

So, I'm not sure what to conclude, but it seems that attacking SU users won't improve the efficiency of their work, judging by the very defensive replies from some above. I would seem more useful to point out why there is a problem, and to suggest that there are ways that SU can be more efficient - either by mapping texture maps to minimise material count, or modelling techniques to reduce poly count. A quick google search will reveal a lot of resources and discussion out there...

Paul

NIARTcar
April 11th, 2012, 08:20 AM
Well, that went well... I don't think anyone has benefitted much from this thread at all - just thrown a lot of insults around, which doesn't really help anyone...

I wasn't going to bite, but I've held my toungue about as long as I could...

The problem with Sketchup is ultimately that it's actually quite hard to create objects in a way that is efficient, and easy to create objects that are high in poly count and texture count, relative to their appearance in-game. In other words, for a piece of content with an identical appearance, the SketchUp version will almost always be less efficient unless the creator is very cunning. Unfortunately, this rarely applies to 3DWH creators. Also, some creators who use SU becasue it is easier than GMax, may well not be prepared to embrace these somewhat trickier optimisation techniques (google ''SketchUp poly count'').

Of course, those with super computers might not mind that it takes all their systems resources to render a scene with just a handful of these objects in it, but consider what happens if a route is created, either for the DLS, or for a new Trainz release that includes a substantial number of these assets. Those running machines near the minimum specs for Trainz are going to see a slideshow (at best), and will probably blame the program, rather than the specific content.

Personally I download some of the SketchUp conversions, and test them on a blank board with the performance stats running. The majority get deleted, either because they are actually quite poor models, or because they have a texture count that is well into double figures (sometimes over 50). The remainder I keep because they provide something not available elsewhere, and I use them VERY sparingly.

So, I'm not sure what to conclude, but it seems that attacking SU users won't improve the efficiency of their work, judging by the very defensive replies from some above. I would seem more useful to point out why there is a problem, and to suggest that there are ways that SU can be more efficient - either by mapping texture maps to minimise material count, or modelling techniques to reduce poly count. A quick google search will reveal a lot of resources and discussion out there...

Paul

YES! +1

Its not going to get any better than this comment right here. I think everyone is aware of this problem, and I'm sure with time we may see a sollution, but any futher conversation really is only beating a dead horse...

Please lets just stop the insults and let this thread die!

cheers

Euphod
April 11th, 2012, 08:23 AM
I would seem more useful to point out why there is a problem, and to suggest that there are ways that SU can be more efficient - either by mapping texture maps to minimise material count, or modelling techniques to reduce poly count.

Now, how could you possibly seem MORE useful than you already are? But thanks for that, nonetheless! ;)

arraial
April 11th, 2012, 08:26 AM
Make a high poly car with 20k polys ,and a Guess this is already to much polys for a single traffic car or a static one, and use that without lods in a heavy populated layout,..
...now make other with 40 kpolys very high poly for trainz but with 5 lods, example stitched lods or with the lm txt file and with the distance 0.7 for the first lod1 with 20k polys , the lod2 with 10kp and the lod3 5kp and lod4 with 2.5kp, now compare them with fps activated or other tool.
I can say the overoull efficiency and better fps was for the very high poly car with 40 kp and 5 lods. in this case wee can use high poly models and very good detail ween you are at 10 or 20 meters distance but wee really need to make lods for then if wee want many high detailed models ones close to each others without affect the fps in the game.

my opinion about all that is ..dont download the high poly models if they are to much high poly if you think this going to affect your fps...
If they are people using sketchup with ruby exporter and they want export and use and also put in the dls they are welcome to, trainz game is for all and dls is for all to. Also remember this users probably using high end machines with 4 or 6 processors and for then this high poly models is nothing....
Wee can download a asset in the dls and check the polys with the tool Pev viewer, open with this tool the main img file in cmp associated to the pev tool viewer select mesh data and then decide if this is good or not for your layouts simple as that.
Some time ago i make some conversions from Warehouse with the tool ruby exporter and show some buildings from London, the bridge and the Big ban in the thread ruby exporter because i was a beta tester of this tool , but never put it in the dls because i consider that to much high poly and to much heavy in textures, later i receive a email from France of a retired man trainzer user ask me for that buildings if i really can sent to then this assets, i say to him this assets going to drop your fps to much because are extremely heavy assets. the answer of the French retired man user was....
i dont care about,.. im a collector of this icon buildings and i want to have it because is not for route layouts but for specific Small area scenery.
I think people forgot they are other people who use trainz not for routes and trains but for Small scenario for make close shots and pictures i already use trainz surveyor with architectural houses made in max and apartments to show to a client in 3d virtual reality this projects and all my projects for architectural houses are very high poly all of then, but run very well because is a localized Small layout.
also my opinion is several points here are......

Are your assets low poly ? yes low poly and med-poly with 4 or more lods

If one created using Sketch Up would it be a rediculously high poly count per asset ? not at all , this depends of the objective and purpose of the model creator, sketch up can create low poly for games if the creator modeling with this purpose, but is a limited program for trainz

There is much discussion about Google Sketch Up being used in Trainz ... I belive this is a bad program for Trainz as it makes extremely high poly assets. this is very controversy , they are low poly models in Google Warehouse but you must select then and search the right ones, unfortunately only less them 10% are low poly and acceptable for trainz games.
Skecthup models with the ruby exporter is like this>>>: my opinion,>>> give a m16 automatic gun to a child and see the results and compare if you give the same tool to a wise adult...

my opinion about the worst programs for trainz game and limitations in order of quality and efficiency and limitations

skecthup - very limited -9 points
gmax - limited +5 points
blender - less limited +7 points

3dmax versions 2008,2009,2010,2011,2012 no limitations +10 i work with this program versions only (max) to create and convert freeware models, the freeware models are for you people enjoy and me to, because i dont have time for doing all, i already have 600 models in the dls and i do not create all of then, if was all creations of mine you people dont have available now from me more then 100 or maximum 200 models in this 2 years, i made locos and wagons from the scracth only for payware and this ones take it my blood in max so i hope this message clear some points for some people on this fired thread.

so...dont worry to much ... be happy....

arraial

SR6900
April 11th, 2012, 08:27 AM
Probably the best reply in this thread, sums up my feelings on this.


Anyone remember the dark ages of computer programing when memory was counted in bits and no effort was too great to reduce code size? Then as memory became cheaper and everyone wanted to write code Assembler and other low level languages were ignored by the new generation. Easy of use was the new mantra and so what if the code was bloated, just add more memory and faster CPUs. Of coarse it didn't last, no amount of hardware could compensate for really inefficient coding. People became tired of waiting while the computer struggling to execute the the programs that were badly made. Now everyone wants snappy performance. Wait for more than a few seconds for a webpage to load and people move on. If the next tablet doesn't work fast enough, it risks serious market share loss.

To a small extent I see the same thing here. The early models had to be so optimum because there was not extra power available to display them. Those that could shave off extra polys without affecting the look were idolized. If the next version of an object had fewer polys, it was praised to no end. Better hardware has allowed to poly limits to be relaxed. New easier to use software allows more people to contribute. This is all a good thing.

If some of the latest objects are rather poly rich, that's just a consequence of the same phenomena that coding went through. One or two super high ploy objects might work but even the best computers will be brought to their knees by dozens or hundreds. I think eventually when the software tools are better understood and mastered, minimizing render times and efficiency will once again be in style.

Meanwhile, as has been said, if it's too much for your computer, let it pass for now. I'm pretty sure when lower poly versions are produced, the market place will sort it out rather quickly. And if your favorite item is never made in a lower poly edition? . No one else seems to notice so you can do without or make it yourself.


Also, some creators who use SU becasue it is easier than GMax, may well not be prepared to embrace these somewhat trickier optimisation techniques (google ''SketchUp poly count'').

This also hits the nail on the head.

Also, 3ds and gMax, like any new software, including Trainz itself, are hard to use at first, but they really are easy to use programs. If you don't try to learn, by playing around, or whatever, you will still think its hard to use. I'm self taught on gMax and later 3ds, really easy programs to learn and I didn't use hardly any tutorials to learn how to get into optimalization of meshes. The more I use 3ds, the more I refine my skill, trying to make things different ways and mastering new techniques. If you just sit at the program and wait for it to throw an SD40 at you, you won't get anywhere and have an illusion that its hard to use. Start simple, and work your way up to the big stuff.

amigacooke
April 11th, 2012, 08:45 AM
I'm so old I can remember when content creation was encouraged for Trainz.

Oh, and no-one has mentioned 3DCrafter (http://www.amabilis.com/products.htm).

mikeman
April 11th, 2012, 08:48 AM
Yes, people CAN use sketchup ,Gmax, 3dsmax or whatever max. The problem that we are going to see down the road with people diving on sketchup and either not fully understanding poly counts or just ignoring them is route builders are going to have more and more problems with their routes and people not being able to run them. If a single car is 20k polys think of that over an entire route. That is just completely counterproductive to the trainz community. Now, a single car having that many polys isn't such a huge deal but what about buildings. What if buildings have that many or roads? We already have to allow rolling stock to creep up the poly count ladder for the sake of high quality visual models. If we are suddenly having 10,15, 20k or more items that aren't even locomotives or rolling stock how many people are going to be on here complaining because a route that uses these items won't run on their computer?

This is not an arguement about WHAT program you use it is an arguement about how you use that program. Please do your due diligence and learn about poly counts and how to reduce them in whatever program you are using so that we can all enjoy great routes to come. I am not even going to delve into best use standards.

cascaderailroad
April 11th, 2012, 08:56 AM
Since I am the OP of this thread I am asking it to be closed ... discussion has been fulfilled.

I asked Ararial, and he too thought Google Sketch Up was rediculously high poly, even when you attempt to cut the polys to a bare minimum ... so Sketch Up IS High Poly.

Never before in Trainz was a program that made ludicrously high poly assets so endorsed, and actually appluaded ... have fun with your high poly assets.

Even I, if I wanted to create assets ... I would take the Quality, hard way ... and learn GMax, 3DMax, Blender, or another low poly program.

Look at all the fine locos on 3rd party sites ... were they created using Google Sketch Up ... The answer is NO !

Ludicrous Speed ... ahead Full
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mk7VWcuVOf0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI4tevra8Lg&feature=related

H222
April 11th, 2012, 09:23 AM
I think it's time for me to pop some corn and grab a six pack.
Mike

Make that a large and you might want another, this could be a long one

Jamie

nikos1
April 11th, 2012, 09:42 AM
Even I, if I wanted to create assets ... I would take the Quality, hard way ... and learn GMax, 3DMax, Blender, or another low poly program.


Arn't you taking the lazy way out by not creating assets and being a armchair critic?

Enzo1
April 11th, 2012, 04:47 PM
Arn't you taking the lazy way out by not creating assets and being a armchair critic?

yes he is....

steve123
April 11th, 2012, 05:42 PM
It is not about being lazy, in Australia over the last year or so Google Sketchup is being taught in all secondery schools ,,,high school as part of there learning programs,,, note not Gmax not Blender young people really have no experience in Gmax or Blender and as far as schools and teaching are concered Sketchup is the way of the future reguardless,

If they are teaching Sketchup in schools then which program do you think they are going to use? of cause the most simple.

so instead of knocking this very simple to use program how about trying to find a way to drop the poly count.
steve

cascaderailroad
April 11th, 2012, 06:17 PM
Because ... with Sketch Up you can only take the poly count just so low, and can not lower it far enough to match GMax, Blender, 3D Max.

You will always have a high poly model using Sketch Up.

Talk about thick ... what part about High Poly do you not understand ... Sketch Up will always be High Poly.

What they teach in schools is an "easy way out" High Poly program ... It doesn't match the Quality, Low Poly of better programs.

You can keep on arguing every which way in the book, until you are black and blue in the face ... but Sketch Up will always be High Poly.

View hese 467 pages of Quality assets: http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?4412-GMax-and-3DSMax-(And-any-other-modeling-program)-screenies-renders/page467

nikos1
April 11th, 2012, 06:24 PM
Heres a really simple solution to the problem. For every high poly sketchup model on the DLS, YOU need to create a low poly model created in 3DS, Blender or whatever YOU spend the time to learn. That way no one will ever need to use one of those sketchup models again. Good luck!

gawpo50
April 11th, 2012, 07:39 PM
I have sat back and read these posts with amusement. In one camp you have the Sketchup fan club and in the other camp you have the Blender, GMax and 3DS fan club. Just for clarification I belong to the 3DS fan club. But I'm not one eyed about it. I happen to think 3DS is the best modeller, others like GMax and others like Blender. It is a fact that these 3 programs along with Maya and Cinema 4D are the only programs used seriously by the movies, graphic modellers and game studios. Sketchup doesn't even get a real mention. Another thing that has been missed here is that Sketchup comes in two flavors, free and paid. The paid version costs $495 USD. Now before writing this, I went and had a good look at the designs available and their quality. Lot's of designs, some quite good ones in fact, but they are about the graphic level of a program I used way back in 1990 called Generic Cadd. It was one of the first serious 3D modeling programs and this is where Sketchup fits in. It has a long long way to go before it can equal Blender or 3DS if it ever can. Both 3DS and Blender can do things that Sketchup can't even dream of yet, maybe never. Now I know I am going to get belted all over creation for what I just said but I do 3D modelling for a living so I stick with my opinion.

Peter

RRSignal
April 11th, 2012, 08:19 PM
Generic Cadd...I seem to recall TurboCAD too being pretty low-end, at least versus AutoCAD.

norfolksouthern37
April 11th, 2012, 08:36 PM
i think that this thread is arguing about two different things. so here are my opinions on both of them.

1. i think sketchup could be just fine for modelling if care is taken to do things the correct way.

2. i dont think google warehouse is a good soruce for trainz models, and i dont consider those who can simply import models from it to be content creators. they are simply content importers.

i am also surprised nobody in this community is mentioning or using the 3d low poly modeller called milkshape. you can so just about anything in it, and i have written plugins for it in the past and was very impressed with it. with the xml importer pretty much any modeller can be used now. i thought of this because some time back and for a totally different game i wrote a plugin to export models from milkshape. like the software that converts google warehouse models to trainz, it was used to import models from other games and from other places and the available content became so full of either old or low quality models i was kicking myself for writing it. imaging how much junk we would have in trainz if a straight import of MSTS models could be made to trainz... i wouldnt like it here very much i can tell you that. it was for the same reason i lost interest in railworks, because rather than focus on making good content, focus was put on importing obsolete content we already had into the new sim. i think what the OP was trying to say is this: start trying to learn how to create better content rather than trying to import lousy google warehouse items using sketchup. i dont see a problem with using it as a modelling tool, you can make crap with any modeller, its making the quality items that takes practice. ive been working in MAX on and off for about 14 years now, and i still have loads to learn.

ModelerMJ
April 11th, 2012, 10:13 PM
What an interesting discussion. I can almost imagine that if I looked out my window I would see a line of trainzpeople windng their way toward my castle, torches in hand.

As I have said many times before, it was never my intention that RubyTMIX be used to simply transfer models wholesale from the 3D Warehouse to the Trainz DLS. It was, rather, my hope that the many excellent models on the 3DWH could be used as starting points and then modified accordingly before being introduced into the Trainz world.

There is also the concept of using (simple) SketchUp models as place holders in a route that is a work in progress, providing a more finished appearance and allowing the route builder to continue on with the larger task instead of getting hung up on not being able to create the perfect building immediately for every spot and, in the worst case, end up never releasing their route at all. I certainly fall into this category and this is one of the main reasons I created RubyTMIX; I then thought it might be useful to others in the community, so I gave it away for free, not really imagining that it would spark such controversey.

I actually have another SketchUp-related tool that is nearing completion and was also to be given away for free; but, sadly, discussions like this give me pause. In any case, I am glad that I have been able to help some, and am sorry that there are those who feel SketchUp (and I suppose, by extension, RubyTMIX) is a blight on the Trainz landscape. Everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion and I appreciate all the comments, both good and bad.


Regards,
-Mike

norfolksouthern37
April 11th, 2012, 10:58 PM
As I have said many times before, it was never my intention that RubyTMIX be used to simply transfer models wholesale from the 3D Warehouse to the Trainz DLS. It was, rather, my hope that the many excellent models on the 3DWH could be used as starting points and then modified accordingly before being introduced into the Trainz world.


i know just how you feel, but sadly people rarely use tools like this as they were intended, but rather as quick and easy one button click solutions to become 'creators'.

steve123
April 11th, 2012, 11:23 PM
Mike, ModelerMJ ,,your program has made so many people far more happier and active in Trainz , it still remains that if these people who do not like assets made with sketchup still and always while have the option to delete them, if a route that they have downloaded has 1,2,3,10 in it then delete that asset and replace it with something else.
please don't stop doing what you are doing Mike, you yourself are an asset to Trainz and to all of us that value what you are doing and have done.
steve

leeferr
April 11th, 2012, 11:46 PM
Forgive me, but this seems to be much ado about nothing. The entire process will eventually sort itself out. Every 'creator' eventually develops a reputation. There are some creators that I download everything that they create because they're that good and then there are others that after downloading a few pieces of their content, I never download again. Everyone will eventually learn which 'creators' to shy away from depending on their machine specs and which ones to grab as soon as they become available. It's just a byproduct of people playing around with tools available to them. We'll get some good pieces out of this process and we'll probably get some bad pieces from it, but in the end, it will police itself.

Mike

steve123
April 11th, 2012, 11:52 PM
[QUOTE=cascaderailroad;971227]Because ... with Sketch Up you can only take the poly count just so low, and can not lower it far enough to match GMax, Blender, 3D Max.

You will always have a high poly model using Sketch Up.

Talk about thick ... what part about High Poly do you not understand ... Sketch Up will always be High Poly.

What they teach in schools is an "easy way out" High Poly program ... It doesn't match the Quality, Low Poly of better programs.

You can keep on arguing every which way in the book, until you are black and blue in the face ... but Sketch Up will always be High Poly.

View hese 467 pages of Quality assets: http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?4412-GMax-and-3DSMax-(And-any-other-modeling-program)-screenies-renders/page467[/QUOTE

So if you don't like something others are not able to use it TALK ABOUT SELF RIGHTEOUS ,,,,do as i do and no other way and if i don't like it you all can't have it,,,, what joke who made you the ruler

cascaderailroad
April 12th, 2012, 01:46 AM
I am ignoring this thread, and fans of Sketch Up.

I even thought of downloading Sketch Up and trying it out ... but then I smacked myself ... and said: Nahhhh !

It's sorta like drinking "Tang" ... when Fresh Frozen Concentrate OJ is available !
http://vintagespace.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/tang.jpg?w=228&h=300
http://peterhirschberg.com/toys/spacefoodsticks/space_food_sticks.png
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsrTjtwFz20
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toG6aSQFF7Y&feature=player_embedded


http://www.museum.state.il.us/ismdepts/art/collections/sadorus/001-100/008PostNoBills.jpg

http://www.thehistorybluff.com/?p=2442 (http://www.thehistorybluff.com/?p=2442)

Close My Thread please

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dd6VXLHKIUM

amrail2000
April 12th, 2012, 02:08 AM
i know just how you feel, but sadly people rarely use tools like this as they were intended, but rather as quick and easy one button click solutions to become 'creators'.
I down loaded a few of the models just to try them out. Yep, they have an extremely high poly count. also in trainz the mesh doesn't look that good for the ones that I downloaded. So what has taken place is this. This has turned into a team project. I do what I can. Then the model is passed on to the next person who does what they can, and so on. So what has taken place at least on my end, is this has turned into a team effort. While I find it unlikely that these will ever be released, at least we are having fun. To me I think that's all that matters.

angelah
April 12th, 2012, 02:49 AM
I was not going to post on this thread at all, but here is my second and last.

Just give people a little slack, that is all I ask. As leeferr says time will sort the question out as to whether or not Sketchup models will stay the course. Aren't we all here to enjoy the Trainz program? We are not creating 'real' objects and running a session in Trainz is not real either. If a person is a rivet counter then I have no problem with that, but equally I have no problem with Thomas the Tank Engine either, each has its place and each can be equally enjoyable.

Can I please ask those that are not very 'keen' on Sketchup to allow those that are to dabble and to do so without tearing them to pieces, and again allow those that have not got the immediate ability to produce sparkling and incredibly detailed assets to keep on trying with whatever tool they find easy to use. Conversely please do make an effort to keep the 'power' of an asset down so said asset will keep Trainz running.

I do not use Sketchup but I did go get it and had a look, so I can speak with a small amount of experience of the program. It looked good to me but then again I was aware of the poly count issue that could become a problem. That caused me not to take it up.

Thanks must go to Mike (ModelerMJ) for putting in effort and time to create helpful utilities that aid users of Sketchup, so Mike, please do continue because every little helps enormously.

Now can we all get back to helping each other? When I joined this forum many years ago this sort of thread was rare, the content of each thread and post was aimed at helping others and that made this forum so great and stand head and shoulders above all others. Let us not lose that, please.

Blessings,

Angela

amigacooke
April 12th, 2012, 04:51 AM
I actually have another SketchUp-related tool that is nearing completion and was also to be given away for free; but, sadly, discussions like this give me pause. In any case, I am glad that I have been able to help some, and am sorry that there are those who feel SketchUp (and I suppose, by extension, RubyTMIX) is a blight on the Trainz landscape. Everyone is certainly entitled to their opinion and I appreciate all the comments, both good and bad.


Regards,
-MikeMike, the loudest voices do not always represent the majority view. I hope that you will continue to develop Sketchup related tools so that people can make their own choice as to what is most suitable for them.

amigacooke
April 12th, 2012, 04:56 AM
2. i dont think google warehouse is a good soruce for trainz models, and i dont consider those who can simply import models from it to be content creators. they are simply content importers. If you make content available for Trainz, you are a content creator. Not sure that makes you a better person though. :)

However, clearly not all content is of the same standard. Even the greats started somewhere.

arraial
April 12th, 2012, 07:30 AM
Hi again , im not against skechup program only i consider sketch-up the worst program to create content for trainz this dont mind is not a great program specialty for architects with out acknowledgement of 3d modeling, the problem is the limitations they have for trainz and that's why i dont use then, i cant make animations, cant put dummys and i cant make rolling stock with then also the good tools for optimize and make lods in max dont exists in sketch-up, also the good materials trainz offer for max are impossible for this program to, for make a low poly model in skechup wee must have many experience in other modeling programs to, for some reason when Auran made exporters for modeling content creations they chose gmax as a elected program tool, lather Auran conclude the bather program and they bet all in this program 3dmax creating exporters only for them recently. Take a example and i consider Ocemy the best creator modeler for trainz, they made the great locos only in 3dmax see the great Russian trainz up content creators and Urman Diesel always create in 3dmax program, why??
but.....this dont mind sketch-up cant create good low poly models or have some off them in the warehouse, i particulari have some assets from sketch-up who made very success in the dls , but i refine then and dont export directly, first i export for 3ds format and them rework the all model in max, putting dummys animation refining textures etc, only then export for trainz.

stechup models i have they are high poly models???

the great problem is not sketch-up or the ruby exporter, because for simple static building and objects are fine, the problem is the way they use then.

Downloaded: 12510 1250 polys ... Downloaded:6274 1268 polys ......Downloaded:4441 2800 polys ..... Downloaded:1798 275 polys
http://images.auran.com/auran.com/trainz/downloads/vehicles/kuid_524343_6091.jpg http://images.auran.com/auran.com/trainz/downloads/vehicles/kuid_524343_6093.jpg http://images.auran.com/auran.com/trainz/downloads/vehicles/kuid_524343_6094.jpg http://images.auran.com/auran.com/trainz/downloads/terrainfeatures/kuid_524343_6096.jpg
Downloaded:641 2.k polys Downloaded:888
http://images.auran.com/auran.com/trainz/downloads/terrainfeatures/kuid2_524343_6328_1.jpg http://images.auran.com/auran.com/trainz/downloads/people/kuid2_524343_6299_1.jpg
arraial

norfolksouthern37
April 12th, 2012, 08:45 AM
If you make content available for Trainz, you are a content creator. Not sure that makes you a better person though. :)

However, clearly not all content is of the same standard. Even the greats started somewhere.


simply importing something from somewhere else made by someone else does not make you a content creator in my opinion. the only thing this person had to do was select an option.

same as making a box in a 3d model program does not make you a modeler

using a brush in photoshop or real life for that matter does not make you an artist.

these kinds of things take practice and hard work. that is a hard reality nobody wants to face.

amigacooke
April 12th, 2012, 09:23 AM
using a brush in photoshop or real life for that matter does not make you an artist.Using a light switch can make you an artist it seems.

Creed lights up Turner prize (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/1698032.stm)

steve123
April 12th, 2012, 04:30 PM
If only one thing is learnt from this thread then it would be that Sketchup creates hi poly assets, But here is the truth, people have to start somewere with creating something and Sketchup is the easier way to learn
rapping your head around Sketchup gives you a much better idea on how the basic's work in Blender & Gmax & so on.
And think about this how many people has Blender and Gmax turned away because people could not get there head around it to start with.
to them Sketchup is a gift that has long been asked for and now it is here,
the best thing that others can do who use the better programs with less poly is to support others with lesser skills and be more active to incourage and guide thoses who wish to learn and take the next step to better assets.

Please can someone who knows paste sites as to where to download these better progams and also the simplest of tutorials for them and then remain vocal to help others or all your whinning would have been for no perpose

other than to down grade others
steve

Euphod
April 12th, 2012, 06:25 PM
using a brush in photoshop or real life for that matter does not make you an artist.

*bursts into tears, runs out of room...*:'(

gawpo50
April 12th, 2012, 06:38 PM
simply importing something from somewhere else made by someone else does not make you a content creator in my opinion. the only thing this person had to do was select an option.

same as making a box in a 3d model program does not make you a modeler

using a brush in photoshop or real life for that matter does not make you an artist.

these kinds of things take practice and hard work. that is a hard reality nobody wants to face.

Couldn't have said it better myself :cool:

johnwhelan
April 12th, 2012, 08:30 PM
Using Sketchup to create a simple scenery object seems fine to me. If its a six sided box Sketchup isn't too bad. However I don't think it can be used to create the lower poly counts used for lod and typically the resources consumed by a Sketchup asset are far greater than one made in one of the more common tools so you get a triple performance impact, multiple texture files, higher poly counts and no lods.

Unfortunately creating efficient content is more complex than most people would like but that the price you pay to get optimised content and currently I think that most people's computers need optimised content in order to get decent frame rates.

Cheerio John

Barry
April 13th, 2012, 02:54 PM
Blender not only can make content but also has an integrated game engine. I make historical maritime routes with it up to 12 miles of mesh for terrain and sea. Using the timeline you can set boat to move on any preset position for hours at a time, stopping and starting at quays; locks and dock gates are easily animated; lift bridges, watermills, swing bridges can all be animated; ships can be launched down ramps, or whatever else you wish to make can be made. Barry. Former Trainz User.

JCitron
April 14th, 2012, 09:55 PM
I am glad this thread has remained open.

As I said before I have used Sketchup as well as GMax and 3ds. I can say that Sketchup is pretty awkward to use. I made a factory building as a test and the scaling was awful. When I exported the model the first time, it was about the size of a pixel and got lost on the baseboard! Eventually I did download the buildings I wanted beause they were readily available and I didn't have to go on a field trip, or struggle with the scaling. My patience level has been getting shorter as I get older, so if anything that could be easy takes more than a few minutes to do, I push it aside.

I have also optimized a few of the simple buildings I imported. They all had issues that needed fixing, and none of my exported 3DWH downloads are high poly, or at least they shouldn't be. They are simple buildings. A few had what appeared to be missing faces and I did optimze some that had a weird extra line of polygons near the roof line. In some ways, this is similar to what I've found with a-cad files being imported in the 3ds or other programs. They have a gazillion polygons which are all disconnected and really render horribly, and worse cause stutters in anything that requires multiple frames. Remember my story about the hidden feet. The factory in that scene was originally an Auto-Cad file. In order use the factory, the model had to be optimized. Faces had to be deleted by the thousands, and others flipped due to normalling issues. This was a lot of work for a 20 second introduction.

Sketchup does the job, as we've found out, but it does not have the optimization or the fine-control tools to do things optimally. It's like using fat crayons to color with. They can color, but it's really difficult to stay within the lines. As an alternative to using 3ds Max which is quite expensive, or the older freebie GMax which has its age showing through, is another program called Carra Studio. This is a decent 3d modeler and imports and exports 3ds Max objects as well as old 3ds format files. From what I recall, the program uses the Kolada plug-ins. I'm not sure if anyone has producted an add-on to import and export data to Auran Jet format. The alternative could be to produce the models in Carra Studio, which I've done before and save them out as 3ds models. The models could then be washed through Blender into the Jet format as well as using the UV-Map plug-in for Blender to texture the models.

John

sparky15
April 14th, 2012, 10:38 PM
Carrara is a pretty easy to use, full featured, all around modeling and animating package. I got Carrara 6 Pro in a magazine and upgraded to 8 for $40. What little I know in modeling is in this program. Problem is, it's a DAZ product now and DAZ makes it's living selling their 3D characters and morphs for Poser and DAZ Studio. The software is not their main focus outside of DAZ Studio. As feature rich as Carrara is, it gets a bad rap because it's associated with "DAZ Dolly Dial Spinners", it's where the main focus of DAZ users is.
You can find some talented modelers who use Carrara, but it's mostly for rendering and animating Victoria 4 or Michael 4 characters. Very little interest in exporting out of Carrara. The joke is what happens in Carrara, stays in Carrara because of limited export options. Even though SDK packages are available to create exporters.*
Shame because it is such an easy package to learn. Have you seen the tree modeling in it? Since version 7, it has Collada support but if you're going to have to send it to Blender for the Trainz exporter, may as well just use Blender to begin with. Also, normal maps require a $35 plugin.
If you're interested in it, keep an eye out in the 3D magazines. A few months after a new release, DAZ usually puts the last pro version out for free. There's also a book called "Figures and Avatars", or something close that has Carrara 6 Pro, Hexagon 2.5 (a great modeler), an older version of DAZ Studio and a couple of hundred bucks worth of content for $15.
Sad the interest in Carrara is low outside of it's user base. Full featured and dirt cheap. I got 6 Pro for the cost of a magazine and 8 Pro upgrade for $40.

Dave.....

RRSignal
April 14th, 2012, 10:49 PM
I downloaded a bunch of the Daz products a few weeks ago when they were doing a great giveaway with free downloads. I have yet to actually try it because I'm too wrapped up...well, um, wrapping up some projects in Blender. That said, I'm going to give it a shot, but am leery of the ability to export/import into a Trainz-capable program like Blender. Blender seems to have issues with Collada imports (even 2.49b) as does GMax AFAIK.

JCitron
April 14th, 2012, 11:15 PM
I downloaded a bunch of the Daz products a few weeks ago when they were doing a great giveaway with free downloads. I have yet to actually try it because I'm too wrapped up...well, um, wrapping up some projects in Blender. That said, I'm going to give it a shot, but am leery of the ability to export/import into a Trainz-capable program like Blender. Blender seems to have issues with Collada imports (even 2.49b) as does GMax AFAIK.

That's interesting to know regarding the Colada plug-in. My brother actually built th,e now built-into Trainz mini-mall I uploaded, within Daz C-Studio. We used a photo for the textures and he exported the model as a 3ds object. At the time, I used GMax to run it through the Auran Jet filter to convert the file. The model imported perfectly into TRS2006 at the time and has been moved forward now into the future versions of Trainz.

I have also used Daz to make a few models myself, although they're quite crude. I'm not so much of a modeler due to my lack of practice and lack of time to do anything with things such as this right now.

I figured this was a less costly alternative to 3ds Max and gives people a decent modeler to use as well since GMax is a bit old and Blender and Milkshape can be a bit overwhelming to get a handle on.

When you're done wrapping or should I say unwrapping your model, let me know how you make out using Daz and Blender combined to make an asset.

I have a funny story regarding this last part, which I'll share at another time.

John

sparky15
April 14th, 2012, 11:26 PM
DAZ Studio is for posing and animating pre-made content.
Bryce is pretty much a landscape modeler, VERY limited modeling.
Hexagon is basically just a modeler with a bridge to DAZ Studio for making content. Some love it, same hate it, all say it's old and buggy, but capable.*

If your only goal is to build assets for Trainz, don't see much there if you already know your way around Blender. If you have other modeling or artistic interests, the three feebies they put out will do you fine for a long time and work well together. Carrara, if you can find it on a magazine for free or in that book, does what all three of those programs can do in one package. But, again, not much use for it for Trainz only, everything will have to go through Blender for that.

Just a heads up.

Dave........

Forgot to mention. Hexagon has a DAZ Studio bridge to send models back and forth seamlessly. DAZ Studio Pro 4 does have an export option to Blender. Unfortunately, Studio doesn't have a manual yet and I'm still at the learning there's a lot to learning 3D stage so don't have the knowledge to use it.

DON49PLM
April 15th, 2012, 12:51 AM
Sketchup to me seem to be a pretty good tool. Its quick, easy to learn and move around in. I am a machinist and for many year have modeled and programmed aircraft parts using software packages costing in exes of $15000. That's my job. Trainz is my hobby… A good modeling program should be easy to learn, easy to us with pull down icon based menus and with fetchers that make the job go fast. I own most of the programs that we have been talking about in this thread and have been reading what has been said. Ya, Gmax, 3dmax, and Blender are good programs if you want to spend a lot of time learning the menus spread all over the place with no icons. But, Sketchup so far is the only program that come close to the very high end modeling programs I use at my work. Now I’m not saying it is the best. It does fall short in the use of texturing the model but ease of use and speed of product completion is very good.


http://hostthenpost.org/uploads/f626940d45ff137679ec829665ee78e4.jpg



Install the Rudy post, learned the program and 5 days latter I have a bulkhead flatcar for haling 60 x 8 girders and only 3895 polys. Not bad.

Konni
April 15th, 2012, 04:53 AM
Hi,

Since the release of 09 we can use highly detailled, high-poly meshes, if we combine them with lod. Admittedly, this requires some skills, but they can be learned! And for learning, don't you start with a heavy 2-10-4 goods steam locomotive, but with something simple like a cottage, or a line keeper's lodge.

Anyone too lazy for that should stay out of content creation. Ineptly made content clogging the computer's computational capabilities is just wasting other people's time and effort and should not be contenanced. If poor quality content becomes a problem, then N3V needs to take steps to banish it, at least from the DLS.

I realize, that utilizing the options offered by Ts 12 tend to make content creation quite demanding. But then, you cannot get good simulations using poorly made content. If I am getting the gist correctly of what users want from an improved trains, then it is realism.

I started with gmax and later switched to blender. I have always been an advocate of making it possible to use different 3D drawing programs. If the standard options of sketchup result in excessive poly meshes, it only demonstrates, that it provides no substitue to the skills needed to create content.

Cheers,

Konni

peghorse
April 15th, 2012, 07:23 AM
Despite the bickering etc this thread is pretty interesting for me. ibtl hehehe
I am want to offer examples of the supreme box that I made in gmax. Yes a box.. :P
or the insanely detailed, flat, single surface billboard that I also made.. ^~ (worked for me).
Neither of these have night mode as they are sooooo fantastic they simply don't need it. o.o
Seriously I did make a ten track overpass/tunnel thingy that was pretty cool, but lost it :(

If people are going to use large size models could they include that info so it is easily found?
Nice to see kiddies using sketchup in schools. (Probably on crapple MacInsploshes).
They teach 'em rap too don't they? Same *quality result I would imagine ^^ L.m.F.a.O
I'm thinking of using this v tool for further excellence. I'll just have to make an exporter for TRS.
Here is a self portrait example of my work so far..
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/4517/etchasketchart8.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/26/etchasketchart8.jpg/)
Kewl hey! 8^)
I'd show more but it's all calculations, theories, bombs 'n stuff like that..
relatively boring really.
Know what I'm sayin? 'cause I don't.

BobCass
April 15th, 2012, 02:10 PM
http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab163/bobcass/Penn3750K4.png

RRSignal
April 15th, 2012, 02:40 PM
Bob, it's great, but if it's 120k polys, it just won't work.

We all saw your first post and I don't think anyone would argue that your loco is gorgeous, and will look even better in-game, under proper lighting. If anything, you've demonstrated the quality of work attainable by Sketchup. But the argument seems to have settled on software inefficiencies and the skills of 3DWH designers.

johnwhelan
April 15th, 2012, 02:48 PM
http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab163/bobcass/Penn3750K4.png

The difficulty is the lods, animation and attachment points I can't see how you'd do them in Sketchup. The one loco I looked at from sketchup was 120,000 polys, or roughly a factor of 10-15 times what I'd expect from 3DS, Blender, or GMAX.

By the way you can export it then there is an adapter somewhere that converts scenery objects into rolling stock so that would get it rolling along the track.

Cheerio John

BobCass
April 15th, 2012, 04:21 PM
RRSignal: Thank you for explanation and your opinion..Makes me feel better about what I am doing..


John: Thank you..I can always count on my friend to respond, giving me Ideas and going on..

johnwhelan
April 15th, 2012, 05:24 PM
RRSignal: Thank you for explanation and your opinion..Makes me feel better about what I am doing..


John: Thank you..I can always count on my friend to respond, giving me Ideas and going on..

I still think you should give Blender another try.

Cheerio John

BobCass
April 15th, 2012, 05:33 PM
john: I tell you what..If you can give me some basic information, I might be tempted..Now I must tell you that I am not computer literate..

RRSignal
April 15th, 2012, 06:22 PM
john: I tell you what..If you can give me some basic information, I might be tempted..Now I must tell you that I am not computer literate..

Look at my post here, Bob.

http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?87755-Help-Getting-started-3d-modelling-for-TS12&p=970575&highlight=tutorial#post970575

There is a "gotcha" over which I tore my hair out - when you define a texture, you have to set the mapping system to "UV" from "Generated." It's one of those things tutorials don't mention or, if they do (even the Trainz ones), they mention in passing. It's also one of those things that, I'm sure, has gotten many to quit modelling, at least in Blender.

steve123
April 15th, 2012, 07:57 PM
Well as you all might know i started building the Sydney Harbour Bridge using Sketchup a while ago and if i do say myself it's coming alone really well but for the poly count which is around 150,000 not complete and i still have most of the webbing in the arch to complete,

but since this thread went up i have spent the last day and a half learning how to use Blender 2.6 although it is slow going i am learning how to make a tunnel from one of the tutorials at the very bottom of the blender.org page
it does seem to be much simplier if you have the tutorial open on one page and blender 2.6 on another to copy what is being done in the tutorial and pause the tutorial if needed and replay until you get it right ,
i am copying how to build the French tunnel using the tutorial which is also showing me where everything is in blender
so i do believe that persistance will pay off
steve

Konni
April 16th, 2012, 05:20 AM
Hi,

Reading through this thread reinforces my impression, that it does not really matter what software you are using. The high-poly problem runs down to very simple questions like these:

How many sides does a cylinder need to have to get the smooth surfacees of a pipe or a boiler cladding? Clearly a pipe needs much less than a boiler, and an electric line even less. Any kind of software will turn out extremely high poly meshes, if the content creator allows the use of 32 sided cylinders for building of what is to become a 1-inch diameter pipe simply because 32 is the default setting.
As long as the content creator can control this by the software he is using, its all right. Knowing how many sides you actually need has to be learned by trial and error. Draw a mesh, fit it it with a simple texture e.g. by a m.notex material export it into trains, place it on a map and look at it, first in surveyor and later in driver too. If you find, that the surface is not smooth enough, redo it!

How many vertex points do you really need to draw the the smooth curves of e.g. a cab window? Clearly, the less the better, but on the other hand if they are too few, there will be no smooth curve. Again, the size and radii of the curve are decisive. As long the content creator remains in control of this, the software is all right.

Which faces are really visible? And here you might want to keep in mind, that trainz perspectives are much more restricted than perspectives on a 3D-drawing screen, where you can rotate your object at will. Again, knowing what you might need and what can be deleted is a matter of hard thinking, honed by (hopefully not too bitter) experience, obtained by placing your object on a trainz map. It is a good procedure to draw a master file first, which contains all faces and then to copy this for further processing like removal of not needed faces, mapping and texturing. If you find out, you overdid it with removing faces, you can go back to the master-file.

Am I mistaken that the locomotive shown by BobCass has 120,000 polys? I agree with John Weelan, that if you observe these points the poly count for the mesh as shown should go down to 12,000 to 15,000 polys. This would leave polys enough to build the covers for the washing holes , which I am sure could be found at the sides of the belpaire type boiler.

That brings me to another point, textures. Blender for instance, helps you building diffuse maps, either by "spraying" paint directly on the mesh, or by mapping faces to a free spot on your texture file followed by painting this spot directly. Blender also has the capability to draw shadow maps, black and white diffuse maps, which show lighted and shaded portions of your mesh. If you combine this with the diffuse map, you are getting a much improved diffuse map. The nice thing about this is, you do not have to be a talented painter to do this.
Nowadays trainz trainz supports normal maps for all kinds of assets, which have meshes. Normal maps are very useful for creating details like rivet heads, ballast, gravel, tiles!!! etc. Blender provides the capability to bake mesh details to normal maps. The capability of normal maps to produce additional details should not be overestimated, but the rivet heads, which were certainly found at the smoke box in the Locomotive shown by BobCass can be convincingly shown by normal maps without adding a single poly. This will, however, work only if you are kowing what you are about and a beginner may need several attempts before succeeding.

Now even a 120,000 poly mesh, may be all right, if it is balanced by lod. Remember, that even with a highly detailled, hig-poly mesh, the number of visible details declines exponentially with the distance between the mesh and the camera. Lod involves having several similar meshes of the same object, which differ in the amount of polys only.
No matter how many polys your high poly mesh has, the low poly mesh for a locomotive body should not have more than 200 to 500 polys. In most instances it may be advisable to have one or two intermediate poly meshes (If I remember correctly, trainz allows up to 9 lod-levels). Depending on the distance between the asset and the camera, the number and sizes of assets shown in a camera view and available computational power trainz switches between the different meshes.
The art of generating a set of lod meshes is to build and texture them in a way that the switches between lod-levels remain more or less unnoticable. I risk being considered a bore by insisting again, that knowing how to reduce polys without sacrificing visible details is a matter of practical experience.

If you are interested in using blender, I would like to recommend the three excellent tutorials written by Paul Hobbs.

Cheers,

Konni

martinvk
April 16th, 2012, 06:08 AM
... . I risk being considered a bore by insisting again, that knowing how to reduce polys without sacrificing visible details is a matter of practical experience.

...

Cheers,

Konni
Not a bore but perhaps preaching to the choir. Everything you said is spot on. Unfortunately those that don't care how many polys they include will continue to do so by fluffing off the issue. It's not what you use it's how you use it.

johnwhelan
April 16th, 2012, 06:32 AM
Hi,

Reading through this thread reinforces my impression, that it does not really matter what software you are using. The high-poly problem runs down to very simple questions like these:


Cheers,

Konni

Not quite Sketch up is in a class of its own. When you take two beams at right angles most software makes them each 6 sides each for a total of 12 sides or 24 polys, Sketchup creates a center cube and four legs for a total of 5 * 6 or 30 sides, ie 60 polys. If you dig back through the posts on sketchup you'll see the analysis. Where ever two bits meet the poly count starts to climb. So for a simple house six sides its fine but the more complex it is the worse it gets.

Cheerio John

amigacooke
April 16th, 2012, 07:51 AM
Not quite Sketch up is in a class of its own. When you take two beams at right angles most software makes them each 6 sides each for a total of 12 sides or 24 polys, Sketchup creates a center cube and four legs for a total of 5 * 6 or 30 sides, ie 60 polys. If you dig back through the posts on sketchup you'll see the analysis. Where ever two bits meet the poly count starts to climb. So for a simple house six sides its fine but the more complex it is the worse it gets.

Cheerio JohnAnd like other software you can reduce the number of polygons.


http://youtu.be/yt3fB2Kib-0

RRSignal
April 16th, 2012, 09:42 AM
Am I mistaken that the locomotive shown by BobCass has 120,000 polys? I agree with John Weelan, that if you observe these points the poly count for the mesh as shown should go down to 12,000 to 15,000 polys. This would leave polys enough to build the covers for the washing holes , which I am sure could be found at the sides of the belpaire type boiler.

No. That was just a "for instance" I posed.

BLACKWATCH
April 16th, 2012, 10:13 AM
Why are you lot of boring beggers ( swop u for e ) still on about this ?
The fact seem to be that 'Sketchup' is too easy for the Gmax, Blender group, so they 'Poo Poo' it as a way
for the braincell challenged creators to make stuff & that it's to "Poly heavy" to be of any use.

The answer to all this bickering & "my gang is better than your gang" has already been given a view as to
how to help each other & make users of Sketchup a valued section of Trainz creators.
All you have to do is give the alternative a bit of consideration & read the bloody post ......................

http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?87764-Would-This-Be-Useful-To-Anyone

Gandalf0444
April 16th, 2012, 10:56 AM
Again the question still remains why us people who use sketchup must cater to people with problems with higher poly content? If i made a creation in 3dsmax and it had a massive amount of polys say 125,000+. and I put it in trainz, used the object and released it, who are you to say what I should do? If I want to use sketchup to make an object with 500,000 polys and release it again who are you to say anything?

I make and convert things for MY use primarily, me releasing what I have done to other people is secondary. If the people do not what I give them then they can either not use it, delete it, or simply not download it in the first place. If I want to create a scene with a few million polys as I have already come close to doing then release the route with that scene, then who cares? That is my right. If your computer cannot cope with it, simple, edit the route to reduce the polys yourself to a level your computer can handle, or suffer through the slide show till you reach a better area, or delete the route from your computer....

Back when I had an old ancient computer I would hate to use routes with super high detailed cityscapes etc..but that wasn't the route creators fault! Or the creators of the individual assets! It was MY FAULT...why do you ask? Because I was the one who did not have an up to date computer that could handle the mass load. I can have parking lots full of my ford vehicles as well as massive skyscrapers all around the parking lot and still pull well over 60fps..while other people will struggle to get 10fps. That is not my problem, I built the content for ME not the people, ME.

johnwhelan
April 16th, 2012, 11:17 AM
Just a comment to those who feel the higher poly counts and number of textures are not a problem.

If you look at the wiki for creating content there are guidelines in there creating content that won't impact the games engine unduly. These apply to all content creation software. Sketch up works fine on a six sided cube or simple house, it is just as efficient as Blender or 3DS or GMAX. It's when you add bits that it starts to get very heavy on the polys.

Basically I think Paul Hobbs has commented that 100,000 polys should not be a problem with lod. However I have yet to see a reasonable way of creating the lods in Sketch up. The number of texture files also impacts performance and from what I've seen with Sketch up it is not simple to have a single texture file.

If you know what you are doing then often you can add in a single sketch up model without impacting frame rates too much but most users don't understand enough about scenery objects to understand the impact on performance of a number of these and to them Trainz has awful frame rates. This is especially true for lap top users with limited machine resources and to me that is an issue.

Cheerio John

Pendolino
April 16th, 2012, 11:54 AM
All you have to do is give the alternative a bit of consideration & read the bloody post ...

I read the whole bloody post...


I'm thinking of doing a video tutorial about how to get a model from Sketchup into Blender, then another on how to texture it and add attachments, and a final one on exporting it.


Also, I will show that some of the many parts created by Sketchup can, in Blender, be deleted or joined with another part, so the poly count can be reduced.

Perhaps I'm losing some subtle meaning because English is not my native language, but this - in my opinion - just confirms that Sketchup meshes need editing in Blender to make efficient Trainz content (and no, my PC is not a Pentium II :D).

hminky
April 16th, 2012, 12:25 PM
It is easy to get SketchUp into Blender. Get one of the DXF plugins and they go right in:

http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/virtual/image/dxf.jpg

Nothing wrong with creating in Sketchup and properly texturing in Blender.

I make things in Pro-E, a cad program and "Trainz" them in Blender:

http://www.pacificcoastairlinerr.com/virtual/image/bomze_1.jpg

I believe the objection to SketchUp is the misuse of a tool.

Harold

johnwhelan
April 16th, 2012, 01:25 PM
john: I tell you what..If you can give me some basic information, I might be tempted..Now I must tell you that I am not computer literate..

I wonder if we can reuse some one else's bogey ie that will save having to create an animated wheel set, anyone any suggestions?

Perhaps KUID2: 262137:90400:1

Thanks John

paulhobbs
April 16th, 2012, 01:36 PM
Again the question still remains why us people who use sketchup must cater to people with problems with higher poly content? If i made a creation in 3dsmax and it had a massive amount of polys say 125,000+. and I put it in trainz, used the object and released it, who are you to say what I should do? If I want to use sketchup to make an object with 500,000 polys and release it again who are you to say anything?
The question has already been answered but I'll try once again: the problem is that route builders will use Sketchup hi poly models in their routes and when somebody downloads the route with the dependencies they'll then start wondering Trainz runs so badly on their machine. The next thing they'll probably do is start yet another thread demanding that N3V invest thousands of man hours developing a new game engine - which would be completely unnecessary if people would stick to the guidelines.


Paul

martinvk
April 16th, 2012, 05:28 PM
I guess what it all comes down to is that some people don't care if they inflict problems on innocent users. The new user who doesn't understand why Trainz is a slide show after loading a poly bloated object will reasonable conclude that Trainz is not worth the effort and go look for something else.

So go ahead, make million poly objects but please don't pollute the DSL with them. Notice I said nothing about what program was used to create them. If someone knows how to make a poly efficient object with Sketchup, more power to them.

Euphod
April 16th, 2012, 09:22 PM
- which would be completely unnecessary if people would stick to the guidelines. Paul

Point taken, but the COC is far easier to access than the Wiki guidelines, and it would seem that few abide by those rules either! One can wish, I suppose!

SR6900
April 16th, 2012, 09:27 PM
http://www.thinkgeek.com/images/products/zoom/b2ae_recursion.jpg

Think this applies to this thread.

Paulsw2
April 18th, 2012, 03:08 PM
....I built the content for ME not the people, ME.

In which case, why bother uploading it? Like you, I have no problem with creators uploading assets with thousands, even millions, of polys. But I do have a problem when they don't explain that their creation is a 'high fat' asset that's likely to cause anything other than a super-computer a severe bout of indigestion. Why are creators so coy about admitting the poly content of their assets?

In my other thread on this subject - regarding gas lamps with 30,000 polys - I've suggested a cap on poly size for certain categories of assets or a mandatory statement about poly size as part of the upload process before assets are accepted for the DLS.

"Buyer beware" by all means, but the 'buyer' deserves to be informed about what he's downloading and currently creators are not being candid about polys. It's time N3V required some honesty about this.

Paul

BLACKWATCH
April 18th, 2012, 04:33 PM
Well I have the policy that regardless of what it says in the licence of any routes I download, if there
are any items in the route that are too poly heavy for what they are (like those lamposts), I will
delete & replace with alternatives, so if my screenshots of a route look slightly different to the norm, that
will be why. At the end of the day, I have the last say at what sits on my hard drives, not anyone else.

johnwhelan
April 18th, 2012, 04:53 PM
Well I have the policy that regardless of what it says in the licence of any routes I download, if there
are any items in the route that are too poly heavy for what they are (like those lamposts), I will
delete & replace with alternatives, so if my screenshots of a route look slightly different to the norm, that
will be why. At the end of the day, I have the last say at what sits on my hard drives, not anyone else.

Yes but how many users know enough to be able to identify these problem assets and find replacements?

Cheerio John

chrisaw
April 18th, 2012, 05:00 PM
It's all very well people with high spec pc's using very high poly asstes, but N3V does give minimum specs the game should run on. So what will happen if they implement the same solution they did for shadows that exceed the poly count recomendations........high poly boxes everywhere?:eek:

Chris.

Gandalf0444
April 18th, 2012, 05:00 PM
The question has already been answered but I'll try once again: the problem is that route builders will use Sketchup hi poly models in their routes and when somebody downloads the route with the dependencies they'll then start wondering Trainz runs so badly on their machine. The next thing they'll probably do is start yet another thread demanding that N3V invest thousands of man hours developing a new game engine - which would be completely unnecessary if people would stick to the guidelines.


Paul
Well Auran does need to get with the program and start developing a newer game engine. But then again the people who download the content also need to take some liability as to why the game is running like crap. Perhaps it could be that the hardware they are using should not be running trainz? Or that in the case of TS12 the specs that Auran said the game could be used on are 100% bogus...


In which case, why bother uploading it? Like you, I have no problem with creators uploading assets with thousands, even millions, of polys. But I do have a problem when they don't explain that their creation is a 'high fat' asset that's likely to cause anything other than a super-computer a severe bout of indigestion. Why are creators so coy about admitting the poly content of their assets?

In my other thread on this subject - regarding gas lamps with 30,000 polys - I've suggested a cap on poly size for certain categories of assets or a mandatory statement about poly size as part of the upload process before assets are accepted for the DLS.

"Buyer beware" by all means, but the 'buyer' deserves to be informed about what he's downloading and currently creators are not being candid about polys. It's time N3V required some honesty about this.

Paul
Why release it? Because it is my right to. It is also my right to put the poly count in the description if I so choose. But most people who know me and talk to me on a regular basis regarding trainz know, that goes without saying that the stuff I use, release and make are very highly detailed or high poly so it goes without saying when they download a building or a car, or even a fully fledged route that it may suffer on your computer.

amigacooke
April 18th, 2012, 05:53 PM
In the final analysis. it's N3V's DLS, game engine and franchise. If they think high polygon inefficient content is a problem, presumably they'll do something about it. Until that point pretty much anything goes.

martinvk
April 18th, 2012, 09:39 PM
In the final analysis. it's N3V's DLS, game engine and franchise. If they think high polygon inefficient content is a problem, presumably they'll do something about it. Until that point pretty much anything goes.They probably should in a perfect world and as long as it remains a potential action. If they every actually did something about the high poly issue, the whew and cry would make this thread seem positively tame.

Euphod
April 18th, 2012, 09:45 PM
This is a perfect opportunity for PEV to release a "Poly Whacker" program. I'm thinking something that could "red flag" poly rich assets and allow the user to decide their fate.

TheWaluigiKing
April 18th, 2012, 10:03 PM
Ok so i admit i use sketchup but at least i credit the orignal creator and i don't consider myself as a content creator.

PEV
April 18th, 2012, 10:12 PM
Oh thanks Ed.. Bit busy with AssetX at the moment.

What you suggest is possible, but it would be like any of the poly collapse gadgets in the 3D modeller programs. They are not very reliable and the results turn to custard very quickly as you play with the settings.

I really don't want to go there..

It would be nice if we could bury an ID in meshes to identify which exporter they come from but unfortunately there's no place to put such info.

Euphod
April 18th, 2012, 11:05 PM
Oh thanks Ed.. Bit busy with AssetX at the moment.

I wasn't really trying to add more to your plate Peter! Besides, I wasn't suggesting a program to "get rid of polys", only one that could analyze the Trainz database and identify which kuids were abnormally heavy in polycount.

JCitron
April 18th, 2012, 11:07 PM
One of the ways of identifying high poly areas in a route is to walk the route. By walking I mean using Alt-Y to get down to track level and walk along quickly. If the camera stutters, there's a problem in that area and that means removing obects. Using this method, I've been able to identify a lot of "bad" objects and even bad track which I replaced with other more useable but not necessarily what I wanted to use in the first place.

I know this is after the fact, but since we have no way to know other than inspecting each model before using it, this method works.

John

bear_ludd
April 18th, 2012, 11:28 PM
I must admit that I have only read part of this thread, but still I have some things to say in this mather.

First of all do not blame or bannish the tool. I consider to move the creation of simple buildings from blender to sketchup since the process is so much faster. Sketchup and the Trainz exporter can be used to create desent low polly models if you know what you are doing. What we need is a good indication of efficient models in DLS and Surveior regardless of which tool they were created with.

There seems to be a few basic rules to follow when modelling in sketchup to avoid inefficent models:

1. Use the tool for things it's good at i.e. mostly buildings.
2. Create separate groups for intersecting objects unless you want them welded.
3. When mapping textures do not use the free pin mode as it will create an extra texture.
4. Map everything on a single texture unless you consider sharing textures among assets in a mesh library. (Sharing textures will need some xml editing for now)

I have and other fought regarding this and that comes down to a trade off pollys vs textures. Traditionally we have been creating one building using one texture say 1024x1024 pixels and then the same for the next building and such buildings end up someware betweene 22 polly for a very basic building and say 1000 polly for a station with lots of 3d details. In sketchup it's quite easy to use flat components for doors and windows, i.e splitting up the walls mapping those windows on a separate texture from the tiling texture used on the wall. Using that method the building might end up with 500 - 2k polly and a 1024x1024 polly texture for the details and a few 512x512 textures for tiling parts like walls, roof and so on. But these textures can than be shared among a large amount of buildings using the same mesh library.

Possitive and negative things with this as I can se it:

+ Fast creation of buildings, you do not have to stick with generic buildings for your route. It litteraly takes less than 30 minutes to create a textured building that takes a day to create in the traditional way with blender and gimp. Offcourse it will take a few days to set up the object and texture libraries.
+ Fewer textures if you have several buildings sharing them.
+ Higher texture resolution.
+- Buildings will look more similar since they share the textures.
- Higher pollycount.
- Generic textures, i.e. no shadows under roofs and so on.

If this is belived to be a good approach, it would be really nice if the exporter would export the textures with consistent texture names betweene models, i.e. based on filename och texture namne instead of a running texture id. For now you have to hand edit the XML and regenerate the IM files.

Further I belive it would be good if someone wrote a simple tutorial for creating good buildings in sketchup.

PEV
April 19th, 2012, 07:10 AM
I wasn't really trying to add more to your plate Peter! Besides, I wasn't suggesting a program to "get rid of polys", only one that could analyze the Trainz database and identify which kuids were abnormally heavy in polycount.

It would be quite easy to gauge the size of the asset components if N3V would let us open things on their server. There's nothing mysterious about opening a cdp file and finding out how big the mesh file is. However I can't see N3V ever letting this ever happening.

In any case I can add a file size gadget to my ArchiveIndex tool (supplied with AssetX). Mesh poly count is roughly proportional to mesh file size, so we can estimate the poly count.

paulzmay
April 19th, 2012, 08:24 AM
It would be quite easy to gauge the size of the asset components if N3V would let us open things on their server. There's nothing mysterious about opening a cdp file and finding out how big the mesh file is. However I can't see N3V ever letting this ever happening.

In any case I can add a file size gadget to my ArchiveIndex tool (supplied with AssetX). Mesh poly count is roughly proportional to mesh file size, so we can estimate the poly count.

Is there a practical way to count materials used in an asset?

A tool that would scan your downloaded assets, and perhaps add some keywords or ratings to them on the basis of poly count, material count, animation and/or LOD would be a great help in selecting the most efficient items for route-building.

Paul

Pendolino
April 19th, 2012, 10:00 AM
We already have the "View technical details" option in CM providing data as poly count, number of textures, etc.. I think it should not be impossible to have CM calculate a "FPS-impact-index" tag value and to add it to the config when a CDP is made.

I recall Konni, I and some others asked N3V (Auran, at the time) to add such a feature well before any Sketchup model arrived on the DLS, but we had no answer.

ModelerMJ
April 19th, 2012, 10:28 AM
If this is belived to be a good approach, it would be really nice if the exporter would export the textures with consistent texture names betweene models, i.e. based on filename och texture namne instead of a running texture id. For now you have to hand edit the XML and regenerate the IM files.


I hear what you are saying. The reason for the 'running ID', as you put it, is because the Ruby interpreter inside of SketchUp is incapable of handling file names that contain Unicode characters. This often occurs in models created by those outside the US, as their language naturally uses such characters. Therefore I came up with this compromise in order to get around the limitations of the programming environment. Also, tracking texture names between models would be (I think) prohibitive (at least from within SketchUp) as it would involve a great deal of searching of the users' hard drive, or coming up with some mechanism to track models.

If the learned folk here can supply me with some solid numbers about the poly-equivalency for a texture, then I can certainly update the summary dialog in my exporter to total up this extra load and add it to the grand total polygon count. I could perhaps also push the polygon count into the 'description' portion of he config.txt file if there is a general consensus that doing so would not be considered too heavy-handed on my part. Note that my exporter does include a warning as a model passes 25,000 polygons during export, and the user must consciously decide to continue the export after the message is issued even though they have been warned that the model may cause Trainz to exhibit poor performance.

Regards,
-Mike

Pendolino
April 19th, 2012, 12:11 PM
If the learned folk here can supply me with some solid numbers about the poly-equivalency for a texture, then I can certainly update the summary dialog in my exporter to total up this extra load and add it to the grand total polygon count.

According to WindWalkr, every texture after the first one is equal to 300 polys.


I could perhaps also push the polygon count into the 'description' portion of he config.txt file if there is a general consensus that doing so would not be considered too heavy-handed on my part.

That would be nice indeed; at least this will provide some advice about the impact of the object.

I would like to add that I think that your RubyTMIX is a great and valuable piece of software; unfortunately it is often used to bring into Trainz objects that are absolutely unsuited for it (like the 30k poly lampposts).

Paulsw2
April 22nd, 2012, 06:27 PM
One of the ways of identifying high poly areas in a route is to walk the route. By walking I mean using Alt-Y to get down to track level and walk along quickly. If the camera stutters, there's a problem in that area and that means removing obects. Using this method, I've been able to identify a lot of "bad" objects and even bad track which I replaced with other more useable but not necessarily what I wanted to use in the first place.

I know this is after the fact, but since we have no way to know other than inspecting each model before using it, this method works.

John

Currently the Developer Stats in Surveyor are able to identify 'bad spline', usually track, in TS10 and 12. Could these stats be augmented to identify the highest poly item in the view? A bit quicker than having to walk the route, though I agree that's a very good way to see if a route really 'works' on your PC.

Paul

norfolksouthern37
April 22nd, 2012, 07:46 PM
According to WindWalkr, every texture after the first one is equal to 300 polys.


textures never equal polygons - maybe in terms of equivalent system load, but it should not count as polygons. even then i am certain that is very general. obviously a 128x128 texture is not the same as a 4096x4096 texture.

johnwhelan
April 22nd, 2012, 08:03 PM
textures never equal polygons - maybe in terms of equivalent system load, but it should not count as polygons. even then i am certain that is very general. obviously a 128x128 texture is not the same as a 4096x4096 texture.

As I recall it each mesh carries an overhead of 300 poly equivalents and each texture one of 200 poly equivalents, this is in addition to the size of the texture file or mesh file.

CheerioJohn

norfolksouthern37
April 23rd, 2012, 12:12 AM
i still think it is ridiculous to look at the overhead as poly equivalent in any case.

seems to me that it would be something you cant nail down to any specific equivalent esp if comparing it to a triangle. every GPU will handle things differently and apples do not = oranges :) . but if you have a certain amount of triangles those are always the same amount of triangles, so poly count is poly count regardless of anything else. again different GPUs will be able to draw more or less than others at any one time. but materials or textures or anything else should not add anything to the poly count of a mesh for the purposes of reporting the poly count in a utility.

Enzo1
April 23rd, 2012, 12:32 AM
OH MY GOSH, I cannot believe this thread is still alive and 13 pages long, do people ever shut their mouths?

johnwhelan
April 23rd, 2012, 07:43 AM
i still think it is ridiculous to look at the overhead as poly equivalent in any case.

seems to me that it would be something you cant nail down to any specific equivalent esp if comparing it to a triangle. every GPU will handle things differently and apples do not = oranges :) . but if you have a certain amount of triangles those are always the same amount of triangles, so poly count is poly count regardless of anything else. again different GPUs will be able to draw more or less than others at any one time. but materials or textures or anything else should not add anything to the poly count of a mesh for the purposes of reporting the poly count in a utility.

Trainz has to load in the files and keep track of them and that's where the overhead comes from not the GPU, its simply expressed as a poly equivalent load.

Cheerio John

ModelerMJ
April 23rd, 2012, 07:29 PM
Trainz has to load in the files and keep track of them and that's where the overhead comes from not the GPU, its simply expressed as a poly equivalent load.

Cheerio John

Thanks, John. The next release of RubyTMIX will place loading information in the 'description' text inside the config.txt file, using the 300 polys-overhead-per-texture figure (after the first). It may not be perfect but it will be more information than has been available so far, and will hopefully help users avoid 'sticker shock' before an overly-heavy asset is placed in a route.

Regards,
-Mike

JCitron
April 23rd, 2012, 07:30 PM
Currently the Developer Stats in Surveyor are able to identify 'bad spline', usually track, in TS10 and 12. Could these stats be augmented to identify the highest poly item in the view? A bit quicker than having to walk the route, though I agree that's a very good way to see if a route really 'works' on your PC.

Paul

There is an added advantage too, Paul. When walking the route, I also not oddities like floating roads, buildings, crooked things, bad textures, etc., that I jot down on scrap paper and go back in and repair.

I have found the statistics aren't really that useful for me. On my route, I use very few spline objects other than roads, power lines, and telegraph poles. There are occasional fences, but there's not enough for them to to impact the running and after removing them, I saw no difference in performance. The big culprits that these stats picked up were the things we need for Trainz - i.e., track. This didn't matter either which track I used whether it was the JR track included with TS12 or some of the older chunky mesh ones.

I did have a performance issue caused by a video card setting a few months ago. One particular section of my route developed wicked stutters that I could not find. I replaced track, deleted buildings, etc., but nothing would stop that section from becoming a slide show. After getting ready to cut baseboards, it dawned on me that I had fiddled with my video card settings! I had set my AA to Edge detect from standard and that little pull down box made a big difference in Trainz performance. This may work for other applications, but Trainz did not like it.

John

norfolksouthern37
April 23rd, 2012, 08:10 PM
Thanks, John. The next release of RubyTMIX will place loading information in the 'description' text inside the config.txt file, using the 300 polys-overhead-per-texture figure (after the first). It may not be perfect but it will be more information than has been available so far, and will hopefully help users avoid 'sticker shock' before an overly-heavy asset is placed in a route.

Regards,
-Mike


it still doesnt add any polygons. that is what i was trying to get across. you could do a total poly count and a material count i suppose. and if you are able to maybe the size of the texture files used in megabytes or something, not poly equivalents...

paulzmay
April 24th, 2012, 06:28 AM
it still doesnt add any polygons. that is what i was trying to get across. you could do a total poly count and a material count i suppose. and if you are able to maybe the size of the texture files used in megabytes or something, not poly equivalents...

True, but most users won't understand if an object with 300 polys and 10 8x8 textures is more efficient than an object with 2000 polys and one 1024x1024 texture. Using the 300 polys approximation, we at least have a rule of thumb. The other challenge in working out an indication of load is the use of LOD. Plus the file size of the textures is no help, as a 1024x1024 .jpg and a 1024x1024 .bmp will have the same load in-game, but may have wildly different raw file sizes.

Anyway - we need some kind of indication, and it wants to be pre-doenload, AND in Surveyor.

Paul

JCitron
April 24th, 2012, 08:10 PM
We've been complaining about the high-poly models, but has anyone else noticed that many of the simplified models with double-sided textures actually cause more performance issues than the high-poly objects?

I saw this recently on my own route. I had used an old building which fit the spot, but the stuttering was awful when I approached it. I removed the building and the performance picked up. As I was poking around the area, I went "inside" the building and noticed the same texture on both the inside of the asset as well as on the outside.

Something to think about...

John

Euphod
April 24th, 2012, 09:04 PM
That's an eye opener John! Perhaps we should just have a thread for troublesome assets where the kuid could be brought to the attention of others, whether high poly, or just an asset that affects performance badly.

martinvk
April 24th, 2012, 09:30 PM
Sloppy object creation is sloppy no matter what program was used to make it. Good tools make the creation easier and let you do more, IF you know how to use them.

Euphod
April 24th, 2012, 09:37 PM
Sloppy object creation is sloppy no matter what program was used to make it. Good tools make the creation easier and let you do more, IF you know how to use them.

I know Martin, I have three kids!:eek:

Konni
April 25th, 2012, 02:45 AM
Hi,


Sloppy object creation is sloppy no matter what program was used to make it. Good tools make the creation easier and let you do more, IF you know how to use them.

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
April 25th, 2012, 05:19 AM
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,

KonniI think we get the idea, lesser mortals don't bother. :)

BobCass
April 25th, 2012, 01:18 PM
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..http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab163/bobcass/6468J1.png

martinvk
April 25th, 2012, 08:02 PM
I personly think it takes just as much time and skill to draw a Engine in Sketch up as do other programs. Exactly my point. It's not the tool, it's the person using it that matters.
.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..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?

JCitron
April 25th, 2012, 09:42 PM
That's an eye opener John! Perhaps we should just have a thread for troublesome assets where the kuid could be brought to the attention of others, whether high poly, or just an asset that affects performance badly.

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

Euphod
April 25th, 2012, 11:09 PM
We have to think of a tactful way of going about this.

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!

WindWalkr
April 25th, 2012, 11:13 PM
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.

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

Konni
April 26th, 2012, 04:51 AM
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

paulzmay
April 26th, 2012, 05:22 AM
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

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
April 26th, 2012, 05:52 AM
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. 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.

clam1952
April 26th, 2012, 06:02 AM
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?

Euphod
April 26th, 2012, 06:23 AM
I second this.

Wow! Somebody agreed with me :eek:. Surely this does not portend well...

Pendolino
April 26th, 2012, 07:35 AM
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.

johnwhelan
April 26th, 2012, 11:41 AM
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

hminky
April 26th, 2012, 11:49 AM
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.
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

Pendolino
April 26th, 2012, 12:05 PM
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.

peghorse
April 26th, 2012, 11:34 PM
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.

amigacooke
April 27th, 2012, 03:11 AM
The community suffers as people produce "crap" so a few people can feel good about themselves. 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?

Konni
April 27th, 2012, 03:37 AM
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

amrail2000
April 27th, 2012, 04:03 AM
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?
After being involved with this simulator for some years now, I have seen things go from GUYS and GALS let's have some, what are you working on. And that is totally cool, to JUST WHY ARE YOU DOING THAT? I DON'T LIKE THERE FOR YOU AREN'T ALLOWED TO DO IT. Simply put, a few have made them self GOD over everyone else and in doing have forgotten about the fun. Now I will be the first to admit that there is some things on sketch up that I wouldn't touch if you paid me to. But I have download some items and gave them a try. Yes there poly count is high. But for me, I know not to flood to any area with them. I use what looks good and do so sparingly. If one of my members asks for an item I upload it to my site only. This way I don't flood (as it has been stated) with this high poly crap. Before I upload anything I do modify it some and edit what I can.

Now please let me reference the below pic. I've noted every item the pic that has come from sketch up.
http://i1005.photobucket.com/albums/af175/saxrt1/example1.jpg
I can respect that not every one would want these items. But I have searched everywhere for these, offered to pay people to make them with no takers. Now from my understanding the people that made these models are not even part of trainz. So they are making them for fun. My self I'm using them for my enjoyment only. If some one asks for an item then I'll share it. The minute they open the config they see this message." XXX Item created by XY-USER. All I did was import it to trainz. Feel free to do with as you wish. So long as credit for the original goes the creator." Now let's jump back to the picture above.

I have 5 items from sketch-up. This area is flooded with 3d grass from the DLS. Not to mention all of the other detail in this one small area. Please understand that I'm not wanting to argue with any one. But I am interested in knowing the answer to a couple of questions.
When I bought the program, who here helped me pay for it?
When did this go from something that all us did for fun, to a full time with a few select employers?
When did everyone become so critical over what some one else did?
When did it become rule that one had to download everything on the DLS? There's things on the DLS that in my opinion are horrible. But I would never say that to person who made it.
When did it become ok for people that I don't even know to call me lazy when all I want to do is have fun with what I paid for?
When it did become a criminal offense for me to down load and use something that some one else may not like?
Lastly, and the biggest question. WHEN DID THIS STOP BEING FUN? Guys that's all I want to is have fun. I spend 7 days a week doing support, so when I get a minute all I want to is kick back and enjoy myself. Now if go by what I see here, then I am no longer allowed to that. I now for some reason have ask for permission to do that. Frankly to me that is not fun. While my specialty is creating routes, I am very careful of the content that goes on any route I publish. The route that these items are on may never be published. If it is published I'd pull these items off as I know not every one wants them. Now before you jump all over me saying that I don't have any routes on the DLS, you're very much correct. I host them myself as they are very large. I also ensure that there is no need to chase down any missing dependency. I hate that as much as the next guy. My point is this. I am going to have my way. I paid for the program. I worked hard to earn the money to buy the program. And if I want to flood with this crap as you guys call it, then it's my choice. But one I can promise you is this. I will never upload anything that I don't make myself to the DLS. Well going on the complaints I've seen, I doubt that I'll ever upload anything to the DLS. My final question for EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU. When can we get back to having fun?

matruck
April 27th, 2012, 07:40 AM
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?

Couldn't of said it any better myself Amigacooke. Glad sumone out there is game enough to say what a lot of other's i'm sure are thinking.
Cheers Mick.

mikeman
April 27th, 2012, 09:11 AM
All I would like to see is some clear identification on the dls of poly counts of items. I use CMP to do my downloading and would like to have a upfront readable polycount of items. I don't want to download a 50,000 polycount lamppost that I have no idea is that high and populate my layout with it. I get that people want to show their skills off to others while they learn. Just please post a polycount. Perhaps it could be put in the config as a requirement for posting to the dls also.

martinvk
April 27th, 2012, 04:37 PM
The community seems to have survived to this point.
...
New creators used to be welcomed and encouraged. Where is the support now?Oh I don't know, perhaps over in the Content Creation Support (http://forums.auran.com/trainz/forumdisplay.php?12-Content-Creation-Support) section. I see many people asking for help and receiving it from other more experienced members.

amigacooke
April 27th, 2012, 06:25 PM
Oh I don't know, perhaps over in the Content Creation Support (http://forums.auran.com/trainz/forumdisplay.php?12-Content-Creation-Support) section. I see many people asking for help and receiving it from other more experienced members.Let's hope that giving technical support in the section that exists for those who are already creating content is enough to encourage new people to begin.

Milwaukeeroad261
April 27th, 2012, 06:45 PM
I used to be a rookie and making high poly stuff, till i got some help with blender and tips and tricks, and also met the gimme pigs. you have to understand what it's like to be a real content creator and not some rookie who says oh look i made something in trainz i must be a content creator. world doesn't turn on that axis kiddies.

Electro
April 27th, 2012, 07:26 PM
I used to be a rookie and making high poly stuff, till i got some help with blender and tips and tricks, and also met the gimme pigs. you have to understand what it's like to be a real content creator and not some rookie who says oh look i made something in trainz i must be a content creator. world doesn't turn on that axis kiddies.

Hi Milwaukeeroad261

Just out of interest what do you call a real Content Creator an a rookie ? ?

I my self have around 171 items on the DLS + anther 200 or so that i have never released, and i have been modeling ( not just for the Trainz serie's ) for around 15 year's or so.

Ok most of the items are just Basic but i have spent some time on them, Would that still make me a Rookie ? ?

THIS is just a Question NOT an Attack on any one on these Forum's


:D Poul

jcayena
April 28th, 2012, 02:59 AM
Seems that a rash of super High Poly assets are being created using Sketch Up.

These Super High Poly assets can adversely effect framerates in Trainz.

Personally I believe Sketch Up is for lazy people who don't want to learn how to create the real thing in a quality program, at low poly count ... and are taking the "Easy" way out !

Hi , i think you really don't know what you're talking about!

All my content is made with Sketchup , some are from the 3dwarehouse (i chose them carefully and i worked on them before exporting to Trainz). There is a difference between 3dwarehouse models which are not made to be used in a game , that's about 90% of them , and models that people made in Sketchup , to be used in Trainz. You can make low poly or high poly in Sketchup like in other modelling software
No , you're wrong , it's not easy to use Sketchup , it's depend on what you want to make and the purpose...

You can be upset , that some people , simply export stuff from google 3d warehouse without adapting it to be used in Trainz...i don't like it neither , and i don't download them..
There are some plugins for Sketchup , to reduce the amount of polys and to delete unseen face in a model.

If someone can explain me how to make the models i made in Sketchup , in 3ds max low polys , only because you made it's 3dsmax ! i'll be happy to read it , because i've seen lot of nice very detailled models made with 3dsmax and extremely high polys , but not exported to Trainz

The problem is not Sketchup , but exporting models to Trainz that are not made to work best in Trainz!

Konni
April 28th, 2012, 03:24 AM
Hi,

The absolute number of polys is no longer important to judge content. With the newer versions of trainz you can have 100k poly assets. But a content creator who wants to upload to the DLS should stick to some rules:

1. Assets with more than about 200 polys must have lod.
2. Poly counts between the different lod-levels should differ at least by a factor of two.
3. The poly count of the highest poly mesh of the lod scheme should be in a reasonable proportion to the object depicted.
4. The level of detail and therefore the poly count should be in a reasonable proportion to the intended use. For instance: a scenery object standing at some distance from a track needs less polys than a buildable that may be seen from a short distance.
5. With meshes covering large areas, higher poly counts are more acceptable than with small ones. A skyscraper e.g. needs more polys than a trash can.

I believe, that based on these suggestions, a set of rules could be devised to define a framework of what is acceptable for uplod to the DLS. A content creator should consider, that even if he gets away with 100 k poly objects with no lod on a route of his own making running on his computer, this may not be that case with routes made by other users, who may not be aware of the poly count, and who use your asset in a context, which cannotbe forseen by the content creator.
If an incomplete asset works well with its creator, that's fine. What I find difficult to understand is why incomplete assets have to be uploaded on the DLS.

Cheers,

Konni

Pendolino
April 28th, 2012, 09:27 AM
When I bought the program, who here helped me pay for it?

I presume nobody did, as nobody helped me... but I don't see how this is related to the fact that the DLS is being filled with high-poly content

When did this go from something that all us did for fun, to a full time with a few select employers?

We are still doing it for fun: but spending a lot of time to find and eradicate frame-killing content is not my idea of fun


When did everyone become so critical over what some one else did?

I think that it is perfectly legitimate to criticise a piece of content someone else made when it turns my Trainz into a PowerPoint slideshow. (and no, I no longer use the PC I used when I bought Trainz 1)


When did it become rule that one had to download everything on the DLS? There's things on the DLS that in my opinion are horrible. But I would never say that to person who made it.

I fully agree with you: I don' want to download everything. I would like, however, to have some additional information about content before I download it: this would help me to decide in advance if it is worth downloading. Now the user has to download it, to examine it with CM or Mesh Viewer to evaluate it. Besides that, I have a lifetime FCT, but I think that users with no FCT are not amused to discover they used their 100 MB quota to download some useless object


When did it become ok for people that I don't even know to call me lazy when all I want to do is have fun with what I paid for?

How should one call the people who floods the DLS with content which could have been made far more efficient - for Trainz use - with only a little extra effort after importing it in GMax?


When it did become a criminal offense for me to down load and use something that some one else may not like?

Nobody has ever requested to turn the DLS into a police state. I defined - ironically - making a 20,000 poly trashcan a "criminal offense" because I'm really tired of examining all the dependencies of a route to find out what is causing stuttering, or of opening anything I download to see if it is worth keeping. If you like having your streets lined with 20,000 poly lamppost, that's fine: nobody ever proposed to ban these objects from the DLS. Many of us, however, would like to know in advance what we are going to download: this does not mean imposing strict requirements about what can be uploaded on the DLS: nobody ever asked to limit the freedom of creators.


My final question for EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU. When can we get back to having fun?

I - personally - am still having lots of fun: I only want to have more. I don't like wasting my time dissecting the content I downloaded to see if it is properly made or not, I want to play Trainz.

JCitron
April 28th, 2012, 09:48 AM
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!

Ed,

You've got me thinking about this for a few days. At first I was a bit hesitant about saying anything, but you're right. We should point out "faulty" assets just like we do those with broken scripts and missing dependencies. This could be another round of DLS repairs, perhaps a second-level clean-up, that's not critical to get assets working but instead to clean-up and make them efficient.

The problem I see is that many of the original authors are no long in this hobby. With textures, the model mesh has to be reworked so that the textures are single-sided when they are assigned in the UV-map coordinator. Ideally having the original author rebuild the assets would be ideal, but with simple box-like buildings which most are anyway, someone could recreate them using textures that have been applied to the mesh properly.

John

Euphod
April 28th, 2012, 09:57 AM
Well John when you start listening to me, you know you're going downhill!:D

I like that you've pointed out that some assets are troublesome for a reason other than a high poly count, or that it was made in such and such program. The problem is how to begin a thread to point out any troublesome content that can bog down the game with it turning into a "Can't find this kuid" thread. Certainly listing a kuid would enable others to verify that something is wrong, and it would bring it to the attention of any creator who may want to fix it. If a fix will not be made, or the creator is no longer active, then at least others could see that it may not be the best choice for a route.

Obviously we don't want to hurt feelings and post derogatory comments, but a simple "This object seems to slow down my performance:" would do nicely.

amrail2000
April 28th, 2012, 09:58 AM
Haven't we discussed this enough? Here's how it stands. Some like this content. Some don't Some want to use it while others won't touch. Both sides do have very logical points. Now it just seems like this is going around in circles and even the OP has lost interest in own thread.

JCitron
April 28th, 2012, 10:05 AM
Well John when you start listening to me, you know you're going downhill!:D

I like that you've pointed out that some assets are troublesome for a reason other than a high poly count, or that it was made in such and such program. The problem is how to begin a thread to point out any troublesome content that can bog down the game with it turning into a "Can't find this kuid" thread. Certainly listing a kuid would enable others to verify that something is wrong, and it would bring it to the attention of any creator who may want to fix it. If a fix will not be made, or the creator is no longer active, then at least others could see that it may not be the best choice for a route.

Obviously we don't want to hurt feelings and post derogatory comments, but a simple "This object seems to slow down my performance:" would do nicely.

Ed,

I always listen to you. Your wisdom is something that I look up to and many times we think alike. :)

I agree again. lol that a thread like that would become a repository of missing things rather than improperly textured things.

John

JCitron
April 28th, 2012, 10:07 AM
Haven't we discussed this enough? Here's how it stands. Some like this content. Some don't Some want to use it while others won't touch. Both sides do have very logical points. Now it just seems like this is going around in circles and even the OP has lost interest in own thread.

You haven't been around the forums long enough?

This is only the beginning... it happens all the time in the Trainz forums. I'd say we can be worse than politicians in congress or parliment! At least we don't have to vote on anything.

John

amrail2000
April 28th, 2012, 10:23 AM
I've been around long enough. I'm done with this. You guys can fight about this till the cows come home. Have fun...

JCitron
April 28th, 2012, 10:26 AM
I've been around long enough. I'm done with this. You guys can fight about this till the cows come home. Have fun...

Whimp! ;)

That's why I poke in every few days. You can go crazy with some threads and when you poke in a few days later, you're not missing much anyway.

It's like plucking a string. The waves are going to ripple back and forth for some time then suddenly die out. What will be funny is months or even years from now, the thread will come back to life like "Chucky"

John

BobCass
April 28th, 2012, 12:45 PM
Hi All: I have a question for you..Is it not true that the more faces you have the higher the poly count??If you extrude something doesn't that mean more poly count??Then it seems to me the way to solve the problem is not to 3D..Do everything in 2D??How boring that would be..To me it goes back to the guys who invented the software in the first place..We need better Technology..That is the way I see it..Tell me if I'm all wet..

martinvk
April 28th, 2012, 03:13 PM
Get out your towel. For objects that are far enough away, 2D versions would work just as well. That's what are called billboards. Many trees were made this way. They also turned to always face the viewer so there was never any danger of seeing them edge on.

Even building and other objects could be done this way. But the real world is 3D so the simulation also has to be 3D if you want to do it so things look right. Real objects have depth and can be seen from all angles so that's how the simulator has to do it too.

Better technology means a graphics system that can do it so fast you don't notice. Easy if you stand still but hard if you move and harder if there are many objects. That's why the requirement to use the minimum number of polys and textures that still maintain the illusion is so important. So sure, it would be easier if it was all 2D but that would break the illusion for all close objects.

WindWalkr
April 28th, 2012, 09:08 PM
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.

As others have noted, this doesn't really work because any asset you upload could then be used by others. Removing it would cause problems for those others. The last thing we want to do is introduce new problems. :-)

Perhaps a mechanism to "hide" your own content from the listings- so it can still be downloaded where required, but won't be trivially downloaded by new users.

chris

WindWalkr
April 28th, 2012, 09:14 PM
What I'd personally like to see is a utility which can test a Trainz asset in a somewhat realistic usage, and report back on the real-world performance. For many objects, "how well does this one object perform?" is the wrong question. A much better question is "how well does this asset perform when spread across the map in a realistic scenario?" It would need to take into account LOD, loading time, buffer usage, memory usage, effect on frame rate, etc.

Of course, that only answers the performance question. Whether the object works as expected and looks nice are completely separate questions.

chris

Dermmy
April 29th, 2012, 02:16 AM
Perhaps a mechanism to "hide" your own content from the listings- so it can still be downloaded where required, but won't be trivially downloaded by new users.

chris

That system used to exist back in 04 days - it was used a lot by creators of stuff like enginespecs and the like where an asset was really only useful as a dependency, but useless as a 'freestanding' asset.

I know the purpose of this proposal is different, but back then as an upload option it caused nothing but trouble and copped endless criticism...

ModelerMJ
April 29th, 2012, 09:24 AM
Just a thought/suggestion here.

In RubyTMIX I make use of the N3V-provided Trainz Mesh Importer to create the IM file for an exported asset, from an XML source file that contains all the geometry and information about all of the materials. It is my understanding that the Mesh Importer is also used as the final step in the pipeline for other exporters from other tools; therefore this is (I think) a 'common' part of the process for assets created in every tool.

If that is true, then I am wondering if there is any way some type of evaluation could be done by this tool, since it has knowledge of the entire asset as it is being processed. For example, if a particular (new) command line switch is used, it could then emit an extra file that is imported into Trainz, and which is recognized by Content Manager, as being an indicator of 'asset weight' or whatever you would like to call it. This in turn could then be available as a sortable column and/or a search parameter in Content Manager, and could also be something that is displayed on the DLS.

Obviously I do not know the technical details of the inner workings of the Mesh Importer utiility, so what I am suggesting may be completely out of line. It just seems to me that the Mesh Importer is a logical place to try to perform some kind of analysis since it would appear to be a common 'entry point into Trainz' for content created in all tools. If I'm wrong about this, no problem... just thinking.

Regards,
-Mike

johnwhelan
April 29th, 2012, 01:01 PM
Just a thought/suggestion here.

In RubyTMIX I make use of the N3V-provided Trainz Mesh Importer to create the IM file for an exported asset, from an XML source file that contains all the geometry and information about all of the materials. It is my understanding that the Mesh Importer is also used as the final step in the pipeline for other exporters from other tools; therefore this is (I think) a 'common' part of the process for assets created in every tool.

If that is true, then I am wondering if there is any way some type of evaluation could be done by this tool, since it has knowledge of the entire asset as it is being processed. For example, if a particular (new) command line switch is used, it could then emit an extra file that is imported into Trainz, and which is recognized by Content Manager, as being an indicator of 'asset weight' or whatever you would like to call it. This in turn could then be available as a sortable column and/or a search parameter in Content Manager, and could also be something that is displayed on the DLS.

Obviously I do not know the technical details of the inner workings of the Mesh Importer utiility, so what I am suggesting may be completely out of line. It just seems to me that the Mesh Importer is a logical place to try to perform some kind of analysis since it would appear to be a common 'entry point into Trainz' for content created in all tools. If I'm wrong about this, no problem... just thinking.

Regards,
-Mike

Logic and Trainz don't mix well, especially when it requires programming from N3V. Actually does it? I wonder how many cases of beer slung perhaps Pev's way it would take to create a tool that created a file that contained the relevant information in a specific format? That could always be merged with the description in the config.txt file.

Cheerio John

PEV
April 29th, 2012, 05:27 PM
Logic and Trainz don't mix well, especially when it requires programming from N3V. Actually does it? I wonder how many cases of beer slung perhaps Pev's way it would take to create a tool that created a file that contained the relevant information in a specific format? That could always be merged with the description in the config.txt file.

John,

You cast out a line and I had a nibble....?? Thanks for the thought in any event. A six pack would be enough for this one..

It's a quite a simple task to analyse a mesh to count polys and textures. The results could easily be automatically appended on to the description. A command line utility (rather than a windows one ) would be appropriate, and hopefully nice and compact. (I'm rapidly running out of space on my website.)

mjolnir
April 29th, 2012, 06:33 PM
.... 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.....

For my part, I'm in complete agreement with Euphod's suggestion to create a list of problem KUID's. My thought, though, is that it should not be in a thread on the forums, but on the WIKI pages. But it seems to me that it need not be limited to items needing work. The opposite list, those items that are particularly well done, should also be established.

Finally, it seems to me that perhaps the key to the issue raised by the original poster is to develop some sort of program to grant credentials to content creators, perhaps in different bits of discipline. Anyone could still call himself or herself a content creator. But those who wish could submit materials to the community for the evaluation, and after evaluation the community would use some mechanism to award an appropriate credential. I would propose that a variety of credentials might be established: freight cars; passenger cars; diesel locomotives; steam locomotives; bridges; buildings; reskins; & any others deemed desirable.

ns

johnwhelan
April 29th, 2012, 08:02 PM
John,

You cast out a line and I had a nibble....?? Thanks for the thought in any event. A six pack would be enough for this one..

It's a quite a simple task to analyse a mesh to count polys and textures. The results could easily be automatically appended on to the description. A command line utility (rather than a windows one ) would be appropriate, and hopefully nice and compact. (I'm rapidly running out of space on my website.)

Could it include a rough size so as to differentiate between a small scenery object of 1,000 polys and a very large one?

Thanks John

PEV
April 29th, 2012, 08:58 PM
Could it include a rough size so as to differentiate between a small scenery object of 1,000 polys and a very large one?

Some one was talking about a measure of polys in a given volume. Or, say, polys per cubic metre.. that may work.. Again dead easy to extract and calculate.

All meshes made with TrainzMeshImporter (any version) and later versions of the 3DSMax exporters have the bounding box specified in the mesh. Not sure about the TACS.

Just thinking of details a bit, I will look at the config to get the highest LOD mesh only. I'll have to cover both types of LOD but that's also easy enough.

I'll add the 300 polys per texture as well. At the start I won't try to compensate for texture image size.

I'm busy with AssetX updates at present, and I have another tool I'm doing finishing touches on as well. Meaning this little exercise may be quite a few weeks away.

norfolksouthern37
April 30th, 2012, 12:00 AM
if you have to put it in please make the material polys separate so we can tell the theoretical polys from the actual ones...

narrowgauge
April 30th, 2012, 12:45 AM
MJmolnir


issue raised by the original poster is to develop some sort of program to grant credentials to content creators
If this happens I will stop creating, this is a hobby not a competition and if it changes I have no desire to compete for arbitrarily assessed credentials.

I have no objections to people criticizing my work 'poly-wise'

Peter