How do I correct this?

[thingfishs]

Hi,
I have a problem with one of my BATs. See how the goal posts (red arrow) look fine but the goal posts (blue arrow), suddenly gain weight about a quarter of the way up (they are clones of the same posts). It seems to be when it extends over the top of BAT itself. Does anyone know what's going on here and what I could do to correct it, thanks.

[cogeo]

Are they separate models (props), or they are part of the main model? (I assume this is the oval area...)

[thingfishs]

the oval, posts and cricket pitch are all one model which is a prop in the schoolyard. Would having them as separate props change things?

[Diggis]

I would think this is because the ones with the red arrow have the playing field in the background, but the blue ones have no background above that point.

[thingfishs]

I would think this is because the ones with the red arrow have the playing field in the background, but the blue ones have no background above that point.

Agreed, but is there anything that can be done about it?

[cogeo]

How is the LODshell like?

Btw the ones pointed by the blue arrow (the top ¾) look better imo (well they need some adjustment). The other ones look like mixed with the grass model.

[thingfishs]

How is the LODshell like?

Btw the ones pointed by the blue arrow (the top ¾) look better imo (well they need some adjustment). The other ones look like mixed with the grass model.

The LOD is normal (automatically generated). The blue arrow ones to me look too fat and untextured, maybe there is a happy medium... 

[Diggis]

Agreed, but is there anything that can be done about it?

Render them separately as per Cogeo's comment earlier.

[thingfishs]

Render them separately as per Cogeo's comment earlier.

I read cogeo's comment as a question, not necessarily a suggestion, but I'll try it.

[cogeo]

Mmmm..., could you post a better (larger) pic? I'm not sure if this is caused by JPEG compression and/or resizing, or if it is how exactly it looks ingame.

Btw this kind of "bleeding" of colours and textures is a known problem of the BAT renderer.
Making it separate models will solve this problem, but it may create another: shadows cast on the LODshell of another model cause an awful, grille-like effect.
I don't think that making a custom LODshell will solve the "bleeding" problem, but it will make it possible to put other props (like people automata) on the field.

For solving this problem (and get really better results), I would consider two radically different solutions:
- Make the oval area a set of (overlay) textures, instead of modelling it (the posts will need to be props, of course). You will have to make a (large) texture and partition in to 128x128 pix -large tiles.
- Use a flat (planar) model  with one Zoom/Rotate view, instead of 20 BAT-generated ones. The process involves no modelling (only texturing). The model must be assigned the material (texture) manually. Take a look at my PedMall-Compatible Transit-Pack on the STEX, to see how this is done (check the "pavement" props/models). I used this technique in order to make the pavement looking identical to the ped-mall tiles. Transit textures look different to lot textures, because the former are displayed through a model. The pavement models in my pack use the very same textures that NAM does, so they look really identical. The model will have to be modified as needed (enlarged).
Don't get very angry with me if this doesn't work though...

[thingfishs]

thanks cogeo

Here is an uncompressed zoom 5 of the oval:

Btw this kind of "bleeding" of colours and textures is a known problem of the BAT renderer.

Does this mean that if it were exported via MAX that this same issue wouldn't occur? I do have MAX but have had to reinstall Windows 7 so it's not currently setup, and thus I've been using gmax. (plus this oval was originally done as a gmax model).

What's the best (easiest) way/program to create overlay textures with?

Also I guess I would like to have automata on the field... there aren't any footy animations but there are cricket ones. Would custom LODs or overlay textures be better as far as these are concerned?

[cogeo]

I don't know if the 3DSmax renderer works better, as far as the "bleeding" is concerned.

Overlay textures can be made using any if the texturing tools (FiSHman, SC4Tool and null45's tool - this has a batch-processing feature too). You just need to supply an additional image (the alpha) in addition to the texture (colour), this is the only difference. Request a range of texture IDs from Barby, if you haven't already.
The only concern in using textures, is that they can't be moved in LE, a texture is placed on a lot tile, so you need to partition it carefully, so that the textures are placed exactly where they should be.

Making custom LODs, using textures, or the planar model I mentioned in my previous thread, isn't "better" as far as automata (or small static props) are concerned, it's simply... required! Use the method you prefer.

[thingfishs]

Well I made the oval and posts separate props but rather than help things it's actually made them worse.
Now both sets of posts look the same, and wrong. All of these posts have identical radii (0.45m) and yet are appearing to be of different thicknesses.  (to my eye as well, the fat ones are also untextured)

Also I'm assuming custom LODs are only necessary if they are over 20cm high (which the ovals' aren't)?

[jmyers2043]

You'll see the same thing if you look close at some of my bats. The earliest barns I did had tall lightning rods that I had to shorten. I did some homes and I positioned the TV aerials at the center of the roof so the loss of detail (or extra thickness) will not be a seen.

You could do the posts as an HD prop. I did some signs for some motels and rendered them as HD. That helped with the extra thickness issue. BUT - The problem with the second effort (for me) is that the prop post will not cast a shadow on another prop (field) ... so you have to decide which of two evils 

My suggestion would be to both shorten the posts (A Maxis Sim is a smidgen under 4 meters tall anyway) and you could also move the posts into the field of play a bit more. I (being from the states) would not notice and would enjoy the bat for what it is ... a sports field of some sort and would not be critical of the posts position.

Good Luck

Jim

[thingfishs]

You'll see the same thing if you look close at some of my bats. The earliest barns I did had tall lightning rods that I had to shorten. I did some homes and I positioned the TV aerials at the center of the roof so the loss of detail (or extra thickness) will not be a seen.

You could do the posts as an HD prop. I did some signs for some motels and rendered them as HD. That helped with the extra thickness issue. BUT - The problem with the second effort (for me) is that the prop post will not cast a shadow on another prop (field) ... so you have to decide which of two evils 

thank you very much for the info Jim

- So this is an unpreventable issue with tall skinny things?

- I will try it as a HD prop, thanks.

shorten the posts (A Maxis Sim is a smidgen under 4 meters tall anyway)

Does shortening them help the situation? What does the height of the sims have to do with it?

and you could also move the posts into the field of play a bit more. I (being from the states) would not notice and would enjoy the bat for what it is ... a sports field of some sort and would not be critical of the posts position.

Why? Will this help also somehow or are you just talking from an aesthetic POV?

[RippleJet]

Why? Will this help also somehow or are you just talking from an aesthetic POV?

If you go back and render the field and the posts as one model again,
it would help if the posts in all views are completely within the green background of the field.

[cogeo]

Well, there's something strange here, none of the models really appears to cast any shadow (eg take a look at the trees and the sheds) - the shadow shown in the first pic is a BAT-generated one (part of the model) rather than game-generated. Make sure you haven't turned them off (check your display options); I would also recommend selecting hardware rendering. And the Is Ground Model property in the prop exemplar must be set to 1 (true), otherwise no shadow is cast. For the oval field (and such low models in general) it should be set to 0 (false), because the shadow shown is unimportant, and the model is in danger of being burried under its own shadow.

For the posts, you can see the problem, the constraint is clearly the game's resolution (if they are some 2 pixels wide, adding or removing a single pixel makes a huge difference). And of course the quality can't be great either. Definitely, HD will help, but it may not be enough either. Try something else: make them 2 or 4 times larger, and then scale them down using the Model Tweaker (this way you will effectively have even higher resolution), but beware, there are limitatations as well.

As for the field, I would say try the planar model proposal. it could be a good solution.

EDIT: Forgot to mention, if you are going to release this, it must be tested with both software and hardware rendering. Also, if you look at the 2nd (uncompressed) image carefully, you will see that the sahdows are cut-off at the edge of the field (this is evidence that no game-generated shadow is really cast). If you test this model with shadows turned on, I guess the result will be hideous, because of the different shadow generation techniques. This alone should rather rule-out the solution of making the field and the posts a single model.

[thingfishs]

thanks cogeo, I've got some options to try now.

As for the shadows, yes I have got them turned off but I haven't been thinking about the shadows, just the width. I always set my models to "is ground model - true" but I'll try turning it off for the oval.
I'm going to need some more info regarding the planar model thing. Also what benefits does this have over just having low (sub 20cm) regular LODs? (which seems by far the easiest solution)

(if they are some 2 pixels wide, adding or removing a single pixel makes a huge difference).

but why are the posts that have had the same tiny amount added/removed ending up with different thicknesses?

[jmyers2043]

If that were my project? I'd do the Cricket Pitch as a ground texture (like the Maxis Soccer Field) - then do the posts as an HD prop to get them skinny. Then you'd have shadows where shadows are supposed to be and the posts would not be too thick.

Look at the Maxis golf course. The greens are props. So trees and other things do not cast shadows on the greens. The same thing will happen to your cricket pitch. 

If you go back and render the field and the posts as one model again,
it would help if the posts in all views are completely within the green background of the field.

That's what I meant to say but RJ said it better ...     

[thingfishs]

thanks Jim, after turning on my shadows I am convinced of the logic of your argument. 


(nothing weird about that at all...)

As for the posts I have tried them as HD props and as large (SD) props then reduced in scale via model tweaker, with mixed results.


The HD version, when compared to the original above, is a marked improvement. There is still some inconsistencies in detail though.


With the model tweaker version the results were highly contrasting, by far the best and worst of the experiment. This first set is almost perfect...


Whereas this one (the same model placed at the other end of the field), now has a post with an eating disorder...

Now I am going to learn how to make the oval into textures... I already have my range. Any advice to make that process less painful would be great.