WIP - Rogue's entry

Started by RogueNZ, June 05, 2020, 09:58:11 am

Previous topic - Next topic

masonspappy

Quote from: Hannes on June 22, 2020, 09:47:18 amI don't know much about Blender, but to me it would be the easiest way to create the objects in another app (Blender or whatever you want), edit them, until you're happy with it, and THEN import into TG. There may be a way to do it the other way round, but I think it's a bit cumbersome.
I agree with Hannes. Best way is to edit to your satisfaction in blender, then import into TG. Remember that you can also export an OBJ from TG as a TGO file once you've got your companion files like spec and display file set up the way you want. It will also save you a bit of memory, usually.

RogueNZ

Thanks for the suggestions,reason the reason I started with terragen was to get the position of the objects correct relative to terrain features and cameraecamera view. I'll give the Obj export a go

luvsmuzik

Isn't all of this dependent on the object origin....and if it is changed rotation inside of TG, does TG export with the new rotation applied as a new origin including rotation? I know you have to know which z is up and it is always confusing me.....

masonspappy

Quote from: luvsmuzik on June 22, 2020, 03:31:48 pmIsn't all of this dependent on the object origin....and if it is changed rotation inside of TG, does TG export with the new rotation applied as a new origin including rotation? I know you have to know which z is up and it is always confusing me.....
Apparently not. I just now loaded an .OBJ, rotated 90 degrees and raised it up a few feet, then exported as .TGO. THen loaded same .TGO back into Terragen. Even though it was TGO it still retained the original coordinates of the .OBJ file. So apologies if I created any confusion.

Dune

Also, I am pretty sure a displaced (displacable) object won't keep its displacements after exporting, if that's what you want. I would just eyeball it, and adjust if needed externally, and re-import.

RogueNZ

Thanks for running that test masonspappy, it was on my list of things to try.

The attached image shows what my aim is - I have positioned the rods in Terragen, and wanted to export them to Blender so I could model the wiring between them. In this photo I have just drawn the wires as a mask, and projected onto a card inside Terragen. This worked ok and will probably be sufficient, but I'd rather have it modeled, especially because there is some weird aliasing going on that I'm not sure how to fix.

Other issue I'm having is banding in the suns shadows, you can see it on the rocks. Doesn't improve with increased AA either.

N-drju

Quote from: RogueNZ on June 23, 2020, 02:17:40 amOther issue I'm having is banding in the suns shadows, you can see it on the rocks. Doesn't improve with increased AA either.

May I ask what are you using as a rock? If this is a native, displaced cube it might be the source of the problem.

I had a similar trouble with a wild shadow being cast out of nowhere on the cube object. Matt has confirmed this was a bug.
"This year - a factory of semiconductors. Next year - a factory of whole conductors!"

RogueNZ

The cliff is just the displaced terrain. Narrowed the cause of the banding down to the lamps, turning them off (or turning off cast shadows) removes the banding. They were saved out of Blender but maybe putting them through Poseray might have an effect? The models themselves look solid.

N-drju

I'm glad you narrowed it down. :) In that case, I would suggest you take a thorough look at how this object looks like in Blender (unless you have already done it) and look for any loose vertices or edges. They will not be visible when rendered out, but may affect how the shadows are interpreted.

It must have something to do with the object if, like you say, turning off the shadows solves the problem.
"This year - a factory of semiconductors. Next year - a factory of whole conductors!"

luvsmuzik

I think it is the card obj...
I put some wire in file sharing maybe useful, just a curve with an array and a bend modifier. Good luck!

WAS

June 23, 2020, 11:34:07 am #25 Last Edit: June 23, 2020, 11:37:26 am by WAS
As far as matching up, no, your best is to just microexport as a single object, and edit that, and import back and align back with current in-place primitives.

Also the issues with aliasing is probably the haze and the robust sampler. This creates really low-res objects and terrain edges at a distance for some reason. Posted about this recently. Normal MPD 5 AA3 scene under robust looks very jagged compared to how it looked back when I was on free edition before robust. And I was even limited to only 720p then where these lower res issues are more prominent to begin with.

Dune

I would still eyeball these poles (and wires), as it seems pretty straightforward. Maybe measure a few distances, make a primitive row of poles around a corner, import in TG, check, adjust, import, check, adjust, and when good, finalize in detail and add wires. Then import finally and do shaders.

Jo Kariboo

I wish you to solve the import problems. So far with what you have presented I expect a high quality image!

DannyG

Lots of mystery in the last one. As with previous challenges I am sure you will make a proper showing
New World Digital Art
www.NwdaGroup.com
Media: facebook|Twitter|Instagram

RogueNZ

I'm at wits end, and not going to finish at this rate. I gave up on the transparent card method for the wire, instead modeled my own. Just when I think I'm done, and despite the model looking perfectly fine in Blender and Poseray, TG decides to render the OBJ like this (see blocky wire, ignore cube)