Hello,
I am currently attempting to teach my self modeling in Houdini. ::)
My first model is to be of a mushroom. I believe I know enough to shape the mushroom in basic terms; stem & cap. However, I need to know before I start which of two ways to go is the best.
Please look at the images below.
I can make the shape of the mushroom, but do I model the details like you see in the underside of the cap in image 2? Or, do I add that as a texture some how? I have read that certain programs allow you to paint texture on in 3D, is that what I should do?
Look at the texture of the stems and of the top of the mushroom in image 1. Should I try to shape that in the model or do I add that later some how?
What would you do? And what is best for super real looking mushrooms in terms of what I asked above?
I am planing a fantasy scene for rendering in terragen2, and so I need the plants I make to all look very real, in order to make the scene believable. Its ok if this takes me a long time.
Thank you guys. All tips and instructions will be helpful.
It all depends on how close you are going to get to the mushroom. I am an experienced Maya user and unless I wanted to get very close to the mushroom I would model a very basic mushroom shape ignoring the bumps and gills and simply let the diffuse network handle the color information. Now if I wanted to get fairly close to the mushroom, I would consider using bumpmaps for the stem and caps and use a normal map for the gills. The reason being, the gills don't really contribute to the profile of the mushroom and lend themselves quite well to a normal map. If I was getting up close and personal with the mushroom, then I would physically model the bumps AND the gills because a bump map does not actually displace the geometry so your profile up close would suffer from not reproducing the silhouette altering bumps. And the gills from very close would have to occlude the deeper parts of the folds.
I of course am assuming that TG2 does not add physically to objects during bump render. I know that's what it does for terrain, but objects are an entirely different beast. I think. I came here to look into custom objects myself.
Quote from: King Mango on March 30, 2012, 10:02:58 PM
...
I of course am assuming that TG2 does not add physically to objects during bump render. I know that's what it does for terrain, but objects are an entirely different beast. I think. I came here to look into custom objects myself.
If you use the micro renderer (by unchecking the "Ray trace objects" in the Full Render window) for objects , it does add detail-displacement .
That's really neat! I wonder does it tessellate the mesh? And if so is it a patch or the whole mesh? Or is it a strictly a screen-space modification? If it tessellates the mesh how important would it be for the asset to have quad topology. i.e. Edge rings/edge loops?
Does TG2 support normal maps?
Thanks Kadri & KM, this conversation is helping.
I have seen some stuff from z-brush and others, they make "painting texture" on, look easy and best. I'm not sure though if in the videos and images I saw, the painting was adding shape and form to the model its self, or just denoting where a texture map is used.
@KM
I will want to get very close to the models, so they will need to have that detail.
Quote from: King Mango on March 30, 2012, 11:50:32 PM
That's really neat! I wonder does it tessellate the mesh? And if so is it a patch or the whole mesh? Or is it a strictly a screen-space modification? If it tessellates the mesh how important would it be for the asset to have quad topology. i.e. Edge rings/edge loops?
Does TG2 support normal maps?
As a matter of fact i really don't care for the technical side.
You can use a very basic polygon and make a real landscape on it if you want. It can get so detailed .
I didn't tested for the difference of quad etc. but the detail of the original makes a difference on the object especially in the edges as i have seen.
No one from Planetside responded so i am not sure but they didn't say that these are wrong so if you want you can look at this thread here.
http://forums.planetside.co.uk/index.php?topic=12248.0
Yeah the thread has a different(!) tone and ends with a kinda Vue propaganda . I prefer Terragen 2 just so you know ;)
I like whichever one gives me the best results lol :D
Actually though I feel the TG/Vue thing has been done to death much like Ford/Chevy, Fender/Gibson, Bebop/Smooth Jazz et al
I haven't tried my hand too much yet with TG2 simply because I don't have the time to throw into really learning it so anything I do is really just noodling around and monkeying somebody's superb scene settings. I have a good handle on the basics by now but I really want to get into custom objects at some point myself.
I'm on my way to that thread right now. :cheers:
Quote from: King Mango on March 31, 2012, 12:30:31 AM
I like whichever one gives me the best results lol :D
...
This is not common on forums :D
I believe that! However I think each has its own style and they are both valid. I do have a soft spot for Matt and Osh though and if it came down to choosing a side it's no contest. But I stay away from such things as I prefer to remain practical.
OK, this got to hard. I'm changing to Hexagon for the modeling part of things, at least for now.
How do you like Houdini?
If you're having trouble you may also want to check out Autodesk's Softimage Mod Tool. It's geared towards the Hammer world editor for Valve games, but I tried it once and it seemed pretty straight forward whereas Houdini seemed overly complex. But my go at Houdini was about twelve years ago. And the price tag back then was ASTOUNDING...
[EDIT]I would start with a profile curve and then revolve it, then pull the shape point by point till it looked organic. Then convert it to an editable poly surface and start doing the little extrusions for the bumps.
Quote from: King Mango on March 30, 2012, 11:50:32 PM
That's really neat! I wonder does it tessellate the mesh? And if so is it a patch or the whole mesh? Or is it a strictly a screen-space modification? If it tessellates the mesh how important would it be for the asset to have quad topology. i.e. Edge rings/edge loops?
It works in the same way as the terrain, except that shadows and reflections won't be displaced. It works with triangles, subdividing each triangle into two smaller triangles, repeating this until the triangles are small enough in screen space and also meet some other criteria. The size of the triangles is controlled by the Detail control on the renderer. This all happens on the fly and doesn't use much memory. When models are loaded, quads are always converted to triangles before rendering. Polygons with higher numbers of points may also be converted to triangles but the results might not be so good.
For anyone picking up this conversation half way through, this only works if you turn OFF ray trace objects on the render node. If it's ON, the displacement information is rendered as bump mapping only.
Quote
Does TG2 support normal maps?
No. Bump and displacement in TG currently work off the same principle, so this usually means a greyscale bump map. You can displace using vectors, but this is not the same as a normal map. If you have a normal map you'll need to convert it to a regular greyscale bump map using some other software.
Matt
:cheers: Matt
Hi,
So here is the first model I have ever done :o
Anyway, now I need to get color and texture on it. Soooooooooooooo.
I made the model in Hexagon 3d and could only find two tutorials on adding texture. I need help now, not sure how to proceed.
Also, when I brought the model (.obj) into terragen it was as tall as a building! Whats up with that?
Lastly, how do I go about getting my model set up so TG2 likes it? What is the best way to save an object for TG
[attachimg=1]
Quote from: TheBadger on April 09, 2012, 10:02:46 PM
Hi,
Also, when I brought the model (.obj) into terragen it was as tall as a building! Whats up with that?
Lastly, how do I go about getting my model set up so TG2 likes it? What is the best way to save an object for TG
[attachimg=1]
After importing the .OBJ model into Terragen, check the "OBJ Options" tab. Putting a checkmark in the "Source in CM" box will make the object about 10x smaller than if it is not checked.
Once you've got your model set up, you can save it in TGO format. Go into your node network and right-click on the box for you object. Select "Save as Object File". Just backspace over the .obj extension in the upper box and make sure the lower box is saving as type "Terragen Object Files (*.TGO). From then on, you'll be able to reload the *.tgo file as it was previosuly set up. Make sure any image files (PNG, BMP, TIFF etc) are in same directory as the TGO file.
It's best to resize in advance. Poseray does it as well. I sometimes import an obj, check it's size (landmark), open it in Poseray and resize accordingly, import again in TG. Poseray also does mapping in a crude but often useful way.
Thanks much, masonspappy, for the how to!
Thanks Dune for the incite into using poser, I need to look into that one now.
OK, so I managed to get color and texture on my model! A great first step for me.
But I clearly have a lot to learn. My model looks very smooth (no bump), and my image textures are really streched and oversized.
Hi,
Is it possible to add a fractal to my models that will make them look wet? There is a thread http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=226.0 that discusses adding snow to trees. I'm guessing that it is therefor possible to add a wet look to other kinds of models, from within TG2.
If so how?
No problem, you can make really slimy shrooms if you like. I did some experimenting just now......
hmmmm... if you could brown the bottom you'd sorta have a dumping.
For a "wet" look just add a reflective shader.
- Oshyan
Thanks Dune. Pretty fun example. It be even funner if you could get that slime to drip off the object. I think having some of the mushrooms slimy is a good idea!
Thanks Oshyan. The easier the better.
Well, just reflective is enough of course; I elaborated a little. You could make the drippings I suppose by redirecting Y down with a white node (constant color, whatever), blended by the drips fractal.
EDIT: it works, but you need to take the fractal carefully for soft drips
HA! Nice one dune. Now solve the global economic problem. I think my last challenge was to simple for you ;)
No problem, TheBadger, I'll throw some blue nodes at it :o
Hey guys, Thanks for the input on this. I have made a lot of progress in learning how to model using Hexagon2. After looking at sculptris and mudbox, and then some other free modelers. It turns out that Hexagon is a great little program, and its still free! I highly recomend it to everyone. Hey, if I can use it, imagene what someone who knows what they are doing can acomplish 8)
I hope to have an image finished for you guys to crit, soon.
In the meantime, I have this rather broad questions about HDR in modeling for TG2... But first can anyone point me to some reading on using HDRI(s) for modeling, and any relevant threads as HDR relates to TG2 (in put, not out)
Thanks!
Last question on this (plus above questions still)
Can I bring a PTEX object into terragen2, or will I be able to in the near future?
I like using Lightwave, since I can build to scale. I run it through Poseray to check my geometry which is good for catching problems with normals and consolidating the geometry and any images.
Here's my first attempt of a palm tree I can see out my window.
Nice lookinf stuff, Jaf.
I have a lot of problems with mapping (unfolding) But I have managed to get some good looking stuff anyway.
I like the idea of PTEX painting a lot! But I don't want to learn it, and make a great model that I wont be able to render.
Very nice, Jaf.
Nice thread.
This is only a test.
[attachimg=1]
I have about 5-10 more models to make for this collection, also have to fix the ones I got. Then I will make an "alien" plant collection to complement the fantasy group.
Comment and suggestions welcome. Also, there are two questions I posted above, if anyone knows the answers ;)
No worries.
Looks good TheBadger :)
They look really nice, TheBadger. How about some fungi that grow on tree trunks? I just got this idea; if you make some of these flattish outgrowing fungi, and let them have several heights in a rough circle, populate them with the same seed as the trees, they would grow on the trees. You'd have to figure out the right size and maybe outward displacement a bit...
Thanks Kadri & Ulco
Ulco, I think I know the plant object you mean, but your method is difficult to understand.
I might try something.... like these.
Very good progress by you Badger, looking forward to seeing your progress. Lichens are also a good subject to try - there are many varieties of these.
Some more testing of these objects.
[attachimg=1]
no texture on these yet. Just wanted to see where they were going.
[attachimg=1]
[attachimg=1]
@Ulco,
Yeah thats something I had planed on making. But I never thought to do it the way you mentioned. I think its a good idea if I plan on multiple shots. Not sure yet. Have to make the models look good first.
@choronr
Thanks
I like your progress very much TheBadger. They look very good :)
:) Thanks Kadri
I'm having trouble with adding my bump map in TG2. I am guessing that I need to add my bump map in the displacement tab of my material shader. Is this correct???!
If so, what are the multiplier, image, function, and offset settings for, what are they supposed to do?
[attach=1]
Correct, find and insert you bump image there. Just experiment; if you set the multiplier higher you get more bump, if you insert a power fractal in the function input, the bump is affected by image as well as PF. Offset makes the bump raise/lower from you offset, which I never use, by the way.
But you can also add a no color PF between the parts shader and the default, with displacement. That adds bump as well.
By the way: I did some simple tree fungus. Same seed and X/Z-rotation offset (in objects) and they stick to the trees.
Thanks again Ulco!
I like what you did! I was going to make plants just for the fungus. But your method is way way better. Much smarter use of time.
Did it work just like you thought. or did you run into difficulties?
It worked as I hoped, but the thing you have to take into account is the diameter of a tree trunk. If you make a bunch of fungi all around an (absent) cylinder, the tree must have the same diameter. If you stick them to one side, like a quarter of the perimeter, you can use the X or Z offset in the fungi object to move it out to fit the tree trunk.
mmmmm...fungus.....tasty....
Hi Badger,
You can see a description of those displacement settings here:
http://www.planetside.co.uk/wiki/index.php?title=Surface_Layer_-_Displacement_Tab
The only difference is that there is the Displacement image parameter in the Default shader, which simply takes an image you want to use to generate displacement. In your case that would be your bump image.
Regards,
Jo
Quote from: Dune on May 27, 2012, 02:01:00 AM
...
By the way: I did some simple tree fungus. Same seed and X/Z-rotation offset (in objects) and they stick to the trees.
Nice way :)
Hello,
Several things have come up as a result of this thread and trying to do what I set out to do. It is likely that these problems are a result of me making a mistake but I can't be sure yet.
A) Problems I found with making .tgo(s) of my .obj(s) for use in TG2
1) After making a .tgo and importing back into TG2, I found that the model was broken into sections. In- between each section was empty space where I could see the background through.
2) The image maps also did not display properly. Image Maps I was using are .png.
3) Displacements set before making the .tgo did not remain set in the resulting .tgo
Of the above, I did not save a .jpg of the render. If no one has seen what I described, or knows what it is, I will try to reproduce it to post an image.
B) Problems applying displacements to objects.
1) Displacements added to smooth objects work. However, not consistently. When adjusting values for displacement (bump) between two acceptable parameters ie; too much and too little, portions of the model that are displaced become completely black. (Note) The nature of the displacement is extreme in the first place; imagine bark on a tree, but acting more like 'frizzy' hair.
2) Displacements to an object set as a population do not seem to adjust relative to the change in the object size when a population is set to vary (for size)
Can anyone explain these things based on my descriptions? Does any of this sound normal, or does it read like user error?
Thank you :)
@ Jo
Thanks for the link. I found it helpful. Why no link from the help button (?) with-in TG2? Are you rewriting it?
Just some praise for you guys: I like the (?) button a lot! I like that there is one in every tab and setting. Most software does not have the help set up that way. But they should! :)
@Dune
I am curious as to how your distribution method for the fungus on the trees, could apply to drops of water.
I would not want to make a lot of plants with water drops on them. But if your method could be applied to models of drops, that then could be distributed en mass to the objects that would be great!
I have not modeled any water drops yet. The only way I am willing to do it is if I can find a good distribution method. What are your thoughts?
Thanks everyone.
Hi,
Quote from: TheBadger on May 29, 2012, 04:44:50 AM
Thanks for the link. I found it helpful. Why no link from the help button (?) with-in TG2? Are you rewriting it?
Do you mean why no link from the Default shader help button? That's because we haven't got to documenting that one yet. The link I posted was from the Surface layer shader.
Quote
Just some praise for you guys: I like the (?) button a lot! I like that there is one in every tab and setting. Most software does not have the help set up that way. But they should! :)
I'm glad you find it useful :-). I think we're making good progress towards there actually being something on the other end when it's clicked too.
Regards,
Jo
It's kind of fickle to make drops on leaves in this method. The leaves and drops have to fit exactly. It's easier to add drops afterwards. Here's screendump of quite a while back, maybe it's of use to you.
Quote from: Dune on May 29, 2012, 12:51:32 PM
It's kind of fickle to make drops on leaves in this method. The leaves and drops have to fit exactly. It's easier to add drops afterwards. Here's screendump of quite a while back, maybe it's of use to you.
That's
freakin' brilliant....is there a .tgc of this in File Sharing...if not could there pretty please be one soonish...thanks and
hat's off to your creativity....
A:
1, 2, 3: Seems like these issues might all be related. I haven't seen them but if it looked like the example in this thread: http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=14620 then it may be a new bug. I'll see if I can test this tonight, but would probably be ideal if you could provide a TGO example file.
B:
1: Extreme displacement on imported objects is not guaranteed or necessarily even likely to work. The higher the geometry resolution of your model the more likely it will work, but still it's problematic. Best to avoid anything extreme on imported models. If you need big geometry changes, do them in a modeling app.
2: That's normal, texturing is in "world space" by default, so it's going to be consistent relative to world position rather than relative object scale.
- Oshyan
Quoteis there a .tgc of this
You can just make it from the screendump, it's not that hard. The drops are small billows I believe. Maybe I'll find a tgc...
Quote from: Dune on May 30, 2012, 03:31:06 AM
Quoteis there a .tgc of this
You can just make it from the screendump, it's not that hard. The drops are small billows I believe. Maybe I'll find a tgc...
problem for me is all the nodes have names on them I don't recognize mate...
Luminosity Another involved bunch of questions. ;)
Suppose you have a sphere object. The sphere is divided into two equal parts at the equator, but is one connected object.
The top dome has one texture and the bottom dome has its own texture.
1) If you wanted light to pass through the object, so that the bottom dome illuminated anything beneath it, to some degree, but the top dome to have no transparency. How would you go about this?
I saw in the objects internal network that there is a tab for transparencies, But I have no idea how to use it.
Do I need to make the map transparent in my modeler first?
If the top dome is not transparent, how can light move through it anyway?
2) Now suppose that you want the entire sphere transparent, and that you want the light source to be within the sphere.
How do you put a light source in an object?!?!?
Thanks guys. Hope I make sense.
Quote from: TheBadger on June 08, 2012, 02:30:26 PM
Luminosity Another involved bunch of questions. ;)
Suppose you have a sphere object. The sphere is divided into two equal parts at the equator, but is one connected object.
The top dome has one texture and the bottom dome has its own texture.
1) If you wanted light to pass through the object, so that the bottom dome illuminated anything beneath it, to some degree, but the top dome to have no transparency. How would you go about this?
I saw in the objects internal network that there is a tab for transparencies, But I have no idea how to use it.
Do I need to make the map transparent in my modeler first?
If the top dome is not transparent, how can light move through it anyway?
2) Now suppose that you want the entire sphere transparent, and that you want the light source to be within the sphere.
How do you put a light source in an object?!?!?
Thanks guys. Hope I make sense.
starting with #2...copy the sphere's coordinates and paste them to the light...it should appear dead center of the Sphere.
#1 is a bit crazier and I can't really answer it but what you want to do is not I think doable in TG3+ as we don't have full access to grayscales and filtering like many 3D apps have...I've tried similar experiments with zero success, ie: putting a light in a lamp . Trying to make Stained Glass from image maps is equally beyond me but keep asking...someone may have a cool trick I'm not aware of....yet....
You could have one object that is visible to camera but does not cast and shadows, and a second object that is invisible but casts shadows. Maybe that gives you the freedom to get the effect you want?
Using opacity maps you can cause some parts to be opaque and others to be completely transparent. It's either on or off, no shades in between, but perhaps you can use an extra light source with shadows disabled to add light into the shadows of the first light.
Global Illumination will also add light from any bright object, so if you put a light inside a translucent sphere, some light will spill out due to GI.
Matt
Matt,
Would what was done in this thread be an example: http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=13536.0
I see multiple lights, and two of them are either in, or maybe behind an object.
I will try to work out your suggestion. Sounds difficult though. But if it works!
Quote from: TheBadger on June 08, 2012, 10:15:44 PM
Would what was done in this thread be an example: http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=13536.0
I see multiple lights, and two of them are either in, or maybe behind an object.
It looks like those two tall lamps at the back could be open-topped, so you wouldn't need any transparencies for those. If you want to do something like that but add a visible dome that lets light through, you could switch off shadows for the dome. That would switch off shadows from all lights though.
Matt
More likely, this thread, TB.
http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=13664.0
Same scene but, Matt's example description is also present in the objects of the animated version. One sphere casts a shadow/reflection, but the opposite version of each object appears in the reflection/real world. That was necessary to make the sphere's behave as I wanted them to. There are two moving objects, both at the same places throughout but you can only see the effect of both together(and believe it to be 'one') by seeing in the mirror and in the real world together.
For example, the shadow/reflections of the pink sphere comes from an invisible geometry sphere where the visible(metallic) sphere(on this side of the curtain) is actually casting no shadow or reflection. I think that's how it worked on that file, at least. Something like that. :D
The two tall lamps are, indeed, open top objects. Those are just basic light sources placed inside with 'visible object' disabled and soft shadows enabled. The main scene light came from an overhead lightsource. The static version of that file is available to download at Terranuts in an image gallery thread somewhere. Not the animated one, though. It's the animation file that contains the weird object visibility settings.
I am going to work this out. I will post the files here.
Michael, did you have any luck posting the files to share? I have a hankering for some fungi related fun!
:)
Jason
Good question Inky, the final render came out great? Wouldn't mind some free shrooms :o
To render or digest?
To render of course ;)
Umm, sure, I guess. Was not going to because they are the first models I ever made. And they were really really big files (basically sculpts).
Most people should have no problem using one or two, but populating will be problematic for users with not much ram.
If you want something from one of these images:
http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,14818.0.html page 1 and 2
and
http://www.planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,15153.msg147522.html#msg147522
Please be specific about what objects you want. Also, give me some idea of where to post them.
I wont share the house from link 2, though. That model moved on to the next level in the project development. Actually, there is a whole village based on that style and look. The house is the home for my main character.
For the final project, most of the models in those images needed to be re done. But they should be fine for still work and simple animations in TG.
Let me know.
Thanks for the interest.
Cheers.
P.S.
I haven't forgotten about the threads I started on the objects, or any thing else I said I was going to do or share. Its just, I learned that to do anything I was talking about doing, required me to learn a ton more stuff then I knew at the time of first posting.
Since then I have learned Maya and Mud, and a number of ideas and ways of doing things. But its a long difficult road. And I have a ways to go yet before I think I will be ready to make and share all that I hoped to... with a comfortable degree of confidence that I know what Im doing, and what Im talking about.
I look forward to finishing the objects threads (including the SSS one) as well as the stuff in the "Mudbox maps" thread.
what a long strange trip its been ;)
Uh, re: the fungi, one of each please kind sir would be really nice. You can zip them up and share in File sharing here as long as they're within the posted limits for size and format...see under the attachment/upload boxes when starting a thread as you'll be doing in File Sharing. Just like posting an image but a .zip, .rar etc. file instead
thanks Michael, free mushrooms is free mushrooms!! I would be happy with any to be honest... the are all beautiful!(?)... what about dropbox or something, what are the average file sizes?
mmmmmushroooommmms
:D
Jason
Yeah dropbox is a cool tool
I don't understand why people don't use Mega more often: https://mega.co.nz/
Free, huge files, no sign-up required.
That being said, Terragen.org will host very large files too. :)
- Oshyan
Thanks for the link Oshyan -great news too about the new site! :)
Jason
Ill go with Terragen.org for all my uploads that won't fit here. I was leaning to that anyway, but I wanted to make sure what sites people prefer.
I feel inclined to remind that your not going to be able to just drop the files in a scene and get the look I got in in the links. There was a good bit of playing in TG to get the textures to play so well. And in the end I had to render twice; Once RTO on and Once RTO off, then painted them together in PS using masks.
You'll need to do this too if you want to keep your green (walli plants) looking their best, and still get the displacement level that you see in my first link.
The models are pretty thick (dense) in the first place. But the really fine displacement is coming from maps on top.... See Oshyan's take in the Mudbox maps thread.
Lastly, please remember that they were my first ever endeavor into modeling, and I really just bulldozed my way through it. So if you get them and you don't like them, you can alter them your self. (Im much better now though! ;D)
Ill register with terragen.org and post this weekend.
Ill post them with the same Copy notice Walli uses on his free stuff. I think the only restriction for that is you cant sell the objects or repost them? Pretty good way to go I think. Let me know if theres a reason not to do it that way.
OK,
I'm having trouble getting this to you. The folder of objects is 1.97GB (There are 149 items in 26 different plant objects). I was only going to share several, but I decided it would be nice to see what images people make if they have enough plants to make a full scene.
I tried to ".7z" the folder of files. But I got 11 files at over 100mb each... Also annoying.
I woud upload to mega or something similar. But downloads from places like that are slow. Uploading is also no fun.
Maybe Walli will adopt these and make some changes to them? Then he could post them on his site as a freebie? I don't know. Something... That does not take all day for me would be nice.
Oshyan? Someone?
:-[
Mega has always been fast for me, both directions. Try it. Or, try Google Drive or Dropbox. But in any of those cases, I would *not* put it in a bunch of 100MB pieces, just upload the whole durn thing.
- Oshyan
Trying mega.
OK, Duh. I stopped using the compressor I had been. And just used the inbuilt app. No reason to encrypt so no need for problematic file types. So now there is just one file almost half the size. And in a simple .zip. Compressed in less than half the time too.
uploading will take 40min. See you then.
Quote from: TheBadger on August 25, 2013, 04:44:07 PM
OK, Duh. I stopped using the compressor I had been. And just used the inbuilt app. No reason to encrypt so no need for problematic file types. So now there is just one file almost half the size. And in a simple .zip. Compressed in less than half the time too.
Try 'IZarc' for unzipping and zipping. Works great and will open automatically every time you click on your zipped files.
The Native OSX compressor works great for this. Never needed it before, but I tried it once many upgrades ago, it sucked then. But works just fine now.
Link will be in file sharing momentarily. It would be nice if someone can test it and tell me if it works for them. It worked for me.
Quote from: TheBadger on August 25, 2013, 05:54:34 PM
The Native OSX compressor works great for this. Never needed it before, but I tried it once many upgrades ago, it sucked then. But works just fine now.
Link will be in file sharing momentarily. It would be nice if someone can test it and tell me if it works for them. It worked for me.
I know I posted in the dl thread but I'll say it here as well...huge dl but it's downloading as I type..started at around 5:40 and looks like at least 10 min. to go yet...not complaining, just reporting.
DONE