TG2 Meta-Clouds thread - Troubleshooting

Started by dandelO, September 21, 2008, 06:30:41 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

dandelO

In this thread, I believe I've created TG2's first volumetric meta-cloud objects...  ;D

http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=3691.msg50489#msg50489

JimB has pointed out something that has been bugging me whilst working on this, there is no easy way to arrange your meta-cloud formations, then to group them and move the entire formation as one object.

Is there a functional way to translate the co-ordinates of each single metacloud object and, bound them inside a new 'capsule' planet(surface AND atmo/clouds disabled in this one, leaving only the bounding box).?

In other words, is there a translate shader/function that would link each metacloud planet to that capsule planet instead of translations being calculated from the main 'planet1', as is default in TG2.
Could a compute terrain node be placed on the invisible capsule planet and then used for the metaclouds settings so they're aligned to those computations instead of the default 'planet1'?
This way, if an adjustment was made to the capsule planet, the results would translate, relatively, to the cloud shapes as they are linked now to that? ...This is getting complicated but, it bloody works and, I'll show the Vue-crew-TG2 sceptics that this isn't nearly the half arsed attempt at a piece of software, like they're(on a whole, not to tar everyone with that brush! I use Vue aswell) so keen to persuade themselves of.

As far as I'm concerned, TG2 is the work of God and, it can do anything, with a little lateral thinking and coaxing(with obvious limitations, it can't fix my fridge or help discipline the kids! C'mon, Matt! Where's the 'Go to your bed and stop jumping on it shader'? I mean, really! :D :D :D).

Can anyone help in grouping these meta-clouds? Any appreciated!

Cheers,
Martin.

choronr

Excuse my ignorance if my thoughts on this are incorrect; but, using Photoshop; and, if the individual objects were .bmps, couldn't you 'group' them and export them back into TG?

Bob

dandelO

The individual objects are the new 'TG2 3D volumetric Meta-clouds. © - dandelO - 2008.' ;). Not .bmp files projected onto objects.
So no, Photo Shop isn't what I'm after. I've grouped trees before in 3rd party apps to use in single populations in TG but, this is slightly different because, built in TG2 objects(grass, discs, planes, spheres and planets(which these meta-clouds are) cannot be exported as models.(and, as yet, there are no 3rd party .tgo editors anyway).

I want to be able to have them take their co-ordinates from another capsule planet that surrounds each group of clouds, therefor meaning that if the capsule planet is moved - the metaclouds will move in relation to that planet, given that that's where they take they're translation co-ordinates from...

Cheers though. :)

choronr

I'm looking forward to trying your clip file ...this sure is fun; and, thank you for sharing.

mogn

As far as I know there are know way to set the coordinates of objects from the outside, or get the coordinates of an object.
It is possible to build several fake objects (e.g giza pyramids) from a vector output of a single node.

Oshyan

As much as I like your "TG2 can do anything with enough creative thinking" approach, I think this is one thing it can't really do at present, and will be difficult or impossible to work around. Considering the entire point is to add convenience, a workaround would probably be decidedly inconvenient and thus defeat the purpose.

That being said this is an obvious area for future enhancement in TG2 and something we will look at for the post-release updates.

- Oshyan

rcallicotte

I like hearing this.  I understand all of the geeks on here trying workarounds and such, but having the functionality work is the only way.  And I don't mean this for only this situation, but for all of the workarounds.  I understand creativity and improvisation will not go away (I hope it doesn't), but the main thing needs to stay the main thing.  Thankfully, it sounds like Planetside believes this.



Quote from: Oshyan on September 22, 2008, 02:11:40 AM
...a workaround would probably be decidedly inconvenient and thus defeat the purpose...

- Oshyan
So this is Disney World.  Can we live here?

dandelO

A question for Planetside Staff... Where do the base co-ordinates, i.e. x=0 y=0 z=0 get calculated from?

It isn't the surface of the default planet because, when I shrink this planet, the x,y,z co-ord's are no longer on the face of the planet. Shrinking the planet radius, to me anyway, should mean that the x=0 y=0 z=0 position should be offset to the surface of the resized planet because the central point isn't being moved. Not so! They are left in mid-air, whilst the shrunken planet now reports negative 'y' co-ords on its surface.

Are the default x,y,z planes somehow linked to planes calculated directly in the centre of the background node or something? I mean, where does the default planet calculate these co-ords from? It can't just be empty space.

As I type this it sounds more and more silly, I know what I mean but not how to explain it.
The planet/scene is obviously built around a point in empty space, designated 0,0,0. With no items at all in the scene, this point will always exist, I get that, I don't get, however, how the default planet's central-core point is calculated and how this is translated to match the surface of x=0y=0z=0.

In a nutshell: Can I make a new planet/atmo, zoom to the surface of that one to render from, look back to my default planet(where the co-ords are calculated at 0,0,0), then disable it's surface rendering and then, move entirely everything that's linked to the original default planet via its bounding box?

Phew! I'm whacked! I dunno, I'm probably talking out of my arse!  :D :D :D

rcallicotte

#8
DandelO, I'm loving your work here. 

I'm not the Planetside staff, but I believe [correction] 0,-6.378e+006,0 is the core of the default planet and 0,0,0 is the place on the outside of the planet where we begin a default TGD session.
So this is Disney World.  Can we live here?

Matt

#9
Quote from: dandelO on September 22, 2008, 10:37:38 AM
A question for Planetside Staff...

The default planet has its centre point at (0, -6.378e6, 0), or 6378 km below (0,0,0). I chose that so that it produces a surface at (0,0,0) when the radius is 6378 km. I could have chosen to use (0,0,0) for the planet's centre and then we would have to travel to (0, 6.378e6, 0) to see the surface of the planet. The numbers wouldn't be so nice then, and actually TG's renderer isn't as accurate at those distances from 0,0,0 due to numerical errors.

None of the object positions or texture coordinates in TG2 move when you move the planet. Everything is independent. I don't think there's a way to move all of your mini planets at the same time within TG2's current capabilities. Until we implement some way to do this, you would need an external tool to generate new positions and write them to a .tgd or .tgc file.

Matt
Just because milk is white doesn't mean that clouds are made of milk.

dandelO

Thanks, Matt. Your clarifications are always much appreciated.! :)

So, how about this grouping of objects issue and the sphere/planet population issues, any advance?