Very important question for serious route builders concerning trees:

Hmm, this is probably not the most helpfull answer, because both are usable in my opinion. What's missing in this equation is how both behave when there are items behind both trees either vegetation or otherwise. I have the distinct feeling that ts12 behaves differently then ts2010 in how alpha's are handled, giving the 'better' feel to ts12.

So there you have it, I'd go for a mix of both I suppose, allthough I would prefer non N3V provided Speedtrees when possible and when placement is nearer to the tracks.

Greetings from sunny Amsterdam,

Jan

Sorry to buck the trend, but I prefer the one on the right. The one on the left looks too "cut-out", whereas the one on the right looks more natural. The problem is that you have shown only one tree in isolation. What would a bunch of them look like (at various heights and rotations). Also worth experimenting which various lighting scenarios

As I said above my wife described them as a ghost forsest. However by adding a few of the other type it does change what they look like. I still use them - more particularly on the top of a hill in the distance where I only want a hint of whats there rather than it being a stark outline. So its horses for courses. Mid-ground I use both and in the foreground I admit I prefer the speed trees.

I like the one on the left, the night view decided it for me.

Hi Ed - I guess I'd go with the one on the left, but with a strong health warning: the problem with screenshots is that they offer a 2D representation of the 3D environment of the game. The tree on the left looks good as a screenshot precisely because it has hard edges, but this means in game that the billboard nature of the model will show only too clearly which, to me, makes them unusable, certainly at less than 500 metres. The tree on the right, because it has soft edges, will probably look better in a 3D environment as the billboards will be less evident., but then you have the problem with the ghosting.

Sadly, I'm not sure that we can get away from the fact that, since TS09, billboard trees don't really hack it anymore, except as distance objects. As we know to our cost, creating realistic 3D foliage is a much more challenging prospect for creators than the good old billboards, but I guess that's the price of progress.

Anyway, good luck with your adventures in flora!

Paul

Late to the party, but the right one works for me. Trees ARE semi-transparent (though not in the mangled-alpha way!) and the left one just looks too blocky and I suspect will look more so in large numbers. The 'washed out' one to my eye looks like a pretty convincing myrtle or similar. But then like Phil I am Australian and 'washed-out' is the normal look for trees hereabouts...

Hi Ed,

Way back in the '04 days, whilst working with the amazing DHR Project team, I was frustrated with the 'see-through' effect of many of the Trainz trees & foliage. ie trees in front would tend to semi-fade-out; as trees behind showed through them (instead of being blocked/hidden).
Dave had come up with a novel twist, by introducing a spiral vertical twist into his trees. This helped with the realism to a large extent. I mention it here, in the hope that you will apply the same idea to yours, as you tinker about. It will be interesting to hear of your findings; relevant to your creations.
The area I was responsible for in the DHR (Darjeeling Himalayan Railway) Project was the lower south-eastern end. I had a major dense jungle area to contend with. Trying to get the jungle density 'feel' was quite difficult, as the ruggedly steep changing terrain made 'anchoring' of anything to it quite hard at times. However the worst obvious problem was the 'park-like' appearance of what was supposed to be basically almost-impenetrable jungle.
Dave once again came up with an excellent solution. He created a background spline that incorporated several relevant trees shrubs etc that matched the single scenery ones for that locale. But what he then did, made all the difference.
He 'tied' single scenery trees to both the front & rear of that spline plain, in such a way as they partially passed through the spline plain.
I then laid these background splines (there were several, of various types/combinations & heights) in a sort of semi-flattened-out zig-zag pattern on either side of the Hill Road. The closest being around ten metres into the jungle, & furthest around seventy metres.
To me, the visual difference was astounding!.

As it's brekkie-time here, I thought I'd share some ffd.
(food-for-thought)

Jananton said:

Hmm, this is probably not the most helpfull answer, because both are usable in my opinion. What's missing in this equation is how both behave when there are items behind both trees either vegetation or otherwise. I have the distinct feeling that ts12 behaves differently then ts2010 in how alpha's are handled, giving the 'better' feel to ts12. (snip) Jan

Click to expand...

All answers are helpful, thank you. I am working in 12 at the moment, and have not tested yet in earlier versions.

daveinblock4 said:

Sorry to buck the trend, but I prefer the one on the right. The one on the left looks too "cut-out", whereas the one on the right looks more natural. The problem is that you have shown only one tree in isolation. What would a bunch of them look like (at various heights and rotations). Also worth experimenting which various lighting scenarios

Click to expand...

No problem, I didn't expect all opinions to be the same, thank you for yours. To answer your question, there is really no difference in different conditions. One looks more distinct, and one looks less. The "ghosting" remains whether backed by other trees, or by a building. It's the color of the background or the objects behind the trees that determines whether this looks acceptable or not.

AntonyVW said:

As I said above my wife described them as a ghost forsest. However by adding a few of the other type it does change what they look like. I still use them - more particularly on the top of a hill in the distance where I only want a hint of whats there rather than it being a stark outline. So its horses for courses. Mid-ground I use both and in the foreground I admit I prefer the speed trees.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that. There is something to be said for an indistinct object at long range, and I agree that the Speed Trees are the way of the future, however, we already have "ghost trees" and Speed Trees, so I am not suggesting they will no longer be available to us, I am simply exploring an option for another choice.

AZRandM said:

I like the one on the left, the night view decided it for me.

Click to expand...

Thank you. Oddly enough I find the night view to be the area that needs work!

Paulsw2 said:

Hi Ed - I guess I'd go with the one on the left, but with a strong health warning: the problem with screenshots is that they offer a 2D representation of the 3D environment of the game. The tree on the left looks good as a screenshot precisely because it has hard edges, but this means in game that the billboard nature of the model will show only too clearly which, to me, makes them unusable, certainly at less than 500 metres. The tree on the right, because it has soft edges, will probably look better in a 3D environment as the billboards will be less evident., but then you have the problem with the ghosting.

Sadly, I'm not sure that we can get away from the fact that, since TS09, billboard trees don't really hack it anymore, except as distance objects. As we know to our cost, creating realistic 3D foliage is a much more challenging prospect for creators than the good old billboards, but I guess that's the price of progress.

Anyway, good luck with your adventures in flora!

Paul

Click to expand...

Thank you Paul, and you're right about most of what you say. I do disagree with the "billboard" nature being more evident with a more distinctly outlined object... up to a point.

Dermmy said:

Late to the party, but the right one works for me. Trees ARE semi-transparent (though not in the mangled-alpha way!) and the left one just looks too blocky and I suspect will look more so in large numbers. The 'washed out' one to my eye looks like a pretty convincing myrtle or similar. But then like Phil I am Australian and 'washed-out' is the normal look for trees hereabouts...

Click to expand...

Thanks Andy, now we are talking about the difference between a tree's "airy" nature, whether you want to say "washed out" or "semi-transparent". I haven't begun to explore the possibilities, but I suspect you and those of your hemisphere are accustomed to trees with less dense foliage, where you can see other objects through the tree, and have more open space between the leaves. Again, I haven't explored this but I do have some ideas. I am taking very small steps, and this post is my first to gauge the reactions to the subject. I am grateful that I've received so many responses, but haven't decided yet whether to forge ahead in my experiments or just let it be at what it is. Part of me is thinking that we can not have too many choices, and yet, I may be wrong about that. In the end I'm only going to do something if it will be useful, and not end up as just more content to sift through.

nbrettoner said:

Hi Ed,

Way back in the '04 days, whilst working with the amazing DHR Project team, I was frustrated with the 'see-through' effect of many of the Trainz trees & foliage. ie trees in front would tend to semi-fade-out; as trees behind showed through them (instead of being blocked/hidden).
Dave had come up with a novel twist, by introducing a spiral vertical twist into his trees. This helped with the realism to a large extent. I mention it here, in the hope that you will apply the same idea to yours, as you tinker about. It will be interesting to hear of your findings; relevant to your creations. (snip)

Click to expand...

Thank you for the lesson. As you probably know, this is a David Drake Tree, artfully crafted for an earlier version of the game, and is built with a spiral design. I have not altered the model in any way, and even though the tree on the left appears darker, I have not made any change to the coloration. Trust me, my skills are limited to very basic manipulation of assets.

Ponder this all you brave route builders; the following picture shows the same trees at sunrise, noon, sunset (although not in the West), and night:



I find I prefer the group on the left in every situation except at night. For those of you with a preference for more "airy" or transparent trees, please know that the illusion created by the blended alphas is fooling the eye to make the tree appear to be less dense. The same tree set against a different background will prove the point. Another tree:



Interestingly this tree, another David Drake creation, is not spiral in design and I think because of this suffers an even worse fate. Although what I have done has made a marginally better tree during the day, I find it suffers at night! I have much to ponder and more experiments to do, but I am confident that somewhere in the degrees of my process the answer lies. I guess the best question to ask is, is it even worth the time and effort? I may spend a little more time on it, or work on it as a back burner project.

Of two minds: it's a shame to lose functionality of an asset that was painfully and artfully crafted for an earlier version, and in doing so lose a choice. It's also embarrassing and futile to continue to flood the DLS with assets that no longer serve a purpose, have lived on past their prime, or that users generally don't have a use for any more. I have purposely not updated some assets I have made for earlier versions because I recognize that they fall into this category.

Thank you all for your comments, they have really helped me shape my course of action!

Dear Ed,

Home alone( Ning has to go court to hear if thai court honor criminals again or us where the latter is not necessarily the winner as xxx talks also in thailand) and continues rain since day before yesterday but not pooring and temps of 26-27C so 80F gorgeous weather if you ask me.
Ed I did send u an email yesterday just to make sure it gets there but no hurry pls.
I see when I answer peoples thread or share my opinion/feeling/experience i notice I,most of the time give contrary thoughts and not follow the yes great wow thing or yeah go for it and yes in this case time will make your work history even before it started if you ask make so again all admiration beside for all your work and Mrs. Manners work I hope you not go with the flow and work instead on state of the art things that have a longer shot of survival than T Rex. Pls Ed don't get me wrong we know each other to long for thinking wrong but I have to if you really think to make new trees this kind of. Rest my case for now and curious on the outcome of this one.
Your work so far is outstanding and a pity I cannot use most of them coz of the code freeze and no time go over the route all again.

Roy

Thanks Roy, I do value your opinion. I replied to your mail, and here you have answered my question! Thanks you for your kind words, and I wish the best for you and Ning and your route!

I'm a bit late to the party too, Ed. My concern is that these billboard trees tend to actually cause a performance issue rather than solve it particularly with TS12. I've noticed this myself recently while loading up "The Loops" route among others. There were major stutters, even on my fairly fast PC, until I replaced the billboards with Speed Trees.

The reason for this is simple. The billboards, flipboards, or whatever you want to call them, actually are rendered through the CPU. This is happening while the chip is very busy trying to run everything else in the route, besides whatever else is happening in your computer such as mouse-clicks, network traffic, etc. This is what makes the billboards not work, and given the heavier code with TS12, this makes things more apt to stutter. With SpeedTreez, the rendering and handling is done directly in the video card, relieving the pressure from the already busy CPU. The video card processor or GPU is a very capable cpu in its own rite. There are multiple channels for memory and throughput which actually rivals some of the I/O capabilities of CPU chips such as the i5s from Intel. In fact NVidia sells a Tesla card which is nothing more than a headless video card. There is no monitor output, but instead the GPUs are used for highspeed calculations for weather prediction, cancer research, and other math-intensive tasks.

So sending the data off to someone else to do the work has the advantage of removing the stuttering cause by thick forests which plagues many older routes. Granted there is a point of no return and one can easily overpower the video circuitry as well if too many trees are put in an area. I've done that myself and had to clean out some of the forest on my own route. There are other advantages too with the SpeedTreez. Among them is they do not have the same "glow in the dark" affect as the billboards do, and not being strictly alpha-blended, they do not have that funny outline that is very apparent now in TRS2009 and above. The Auran examples are a poor comparison to McGuirrel's fine selection or those by Jan, Pofig, or Gawpo50.

The disadvantage of SpeedTreez is sadly they all seem too big no matter who makes them or what tree they're supposed to be. Not all routes in my area are are under the bows of the great oaks, yet the foliage is quite thick at the lineside. It would be nice to have some trees that aren't overly detailed, and are a smaller size - bigger than a bush or shrub, yet are small trees. This is very helpful for us east-coast folks where foliage rules everywhere, and for those that model heavily covered areas. Burying the trees, but adjusting their height only works to a certain extent. When things are adjust in TS12, they all pop up to their original height again, requiring adjustment all over again.

John

So John, in effect you are acting as a Knight Who Says "Nii", and will say "Nii" until someone fetches you a shubbery?

I thank you for your input.

The one on the left. It doesn't matter if you fix either built in or DLS trees with the transparency issue (or any other content for that matter) if the route is intended to go public, as everyone else still has the original version.

Thanks Vern, but if I were to fix anything, they would be uploaded to the DLS.

Please count me in the "both" minority. Depending upon circumstances, I can actually see value to each one, either mixed in the same stand of trees, or perhaps the ones on the left in a stand in one place, and the ones on the right in a stand in another.

ns

Euphod said:

So John, in effect you are acting as a Knight Who Says "Nii", and will say "Nii" until someone fetches you a shubbery?

I thank you for your input.

Click to expand...

Nii - clip-clop, clip-clop of the coconuts.

I'll take the one in the middle. :hehe:
To be honest though, they would just end up at the back of the store cupboard with all the other old cross trees.
As John has pointed out above, the new generations of trees are much more computer friendly and realistic. :wave:

Thanks for your thoughts on the subject. I agree that the Speedtrees are an advantage, but some people just hate 'em! I was leaning towards not doing any more work on the content, but after reading a post from Dermmy, I realized some don't want to use Speedtrees. So my decision is....maybe.

Euphod said:

... I agree that the Speedtrees are an advantage, but some people just hate 'em! ...

Click to expand...

That's why I added any non N3V speedtrees to my reply. :hehe:

One can certainly understand that when it was a new phenomenon the quality wasn't realy to write home about to start with, however keeping the same low quality standard in the following release version, while there where much better types available allready, was in my opinion a big mistake, leading to the dislike of them by many.

Personally I'm a great fan of Pofig's Speedtree creations, but sadly his enthousiasm was destroyed in the same kind of way Andy has encountered recently. Luckely Pofig's enormous ouvre of trees are available still fom his site(s), but nobody knows how long this lasts and that's really a headache for those who use them allmost exclusively in route building, me included.

I certainly hope this trend, a payware push that I remember from my flightsimulator days at the cost of enthousiast creators that did it only for fun, doesn't take hold here, that would really be a very sad devellopment.

Sorry I drifted off topick, I suddenly couldn't refrain from typing...

Greetings from sunny Amsterdam,

Jan

Jananton said:

I certainly hope this trend, a payware push that I remember from my flightsimulator days at the cost of enthousiast creators that did it only for fun, doesn't take hold here, that would really be a very sad devellopment.

Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more! I don't want to vilify payware, as it certainly has it's place, but when payware becomes the only source of creation, the game will suffer.