CFS3
And after adding a little bump to the rivets in the above gmax screenie:
I know, it's not supposed to look like an old Airfix kit and the P-47 had flush rivets but still...
And after adding a little bump to the rivets in the above gmax screenie:
I know, it's not supposed to look like an old Airfix kit and the P-47 had flush rivets but still...
ACC Member, ETO and PTO contributor & librarian
Drooool . . . . I've been wondering, what with the crazy large bump map dds files, will I have to sell a kidney and fork out for a decent video card, to properly enjoy such a painstakingly carefully crafted model? There are so many tasty new models with 15 Mb bump map textures, not to mention Airfighter55's massive texture files for vehicles.
Can't wait for this bird
Keep your kidneys where they serve best, I would sayOriginally Posted by Daiwilletti
:
I have an old PC with a graphics card a friend gave to me: Intel i7 2,93GHz 4Gb RAM, originally Win7 Home x64 upgraded to Win10, Radeon HD5700 1024Mb. I get around 50-58 FPS in clear skies with this P-47 model and around 25-30 FPS over ACC airfields. Occasional stutter but nothing serious. I do use GameBooster to close as much background processes as possible before I start CFS3 and TrackIR.
The model texture files are not as big as Renatus' but the model is not finished yet. I am working with 4096x4096 textures, giving roughly 8Mb .dds files.
ACC Member, ETO and PTO contributor & librarian
Absolutely no problem with you fab model having good sized textures Frosty! Absolutely a must for such a lovingly made model.
I guess I was thinking aloud about the cumulative effect of all the bump map textures of all the fab new models that are filling CFS3 skies recently. My vid card seems ok apart from a weird model cache overflow reported in the D3D log. It will be great if I can render them in all their glory.
Joost, I was just thinking about 4096 textures in bed last night
Cato said "Carthaginem esse delendam"
I say "Carthago iam diu deleta,sed enim Bellum Alium adhuc aedificandum est"
The mos file generator does not allow for large textures. This used to drive me crazy when I would upscale a texture and then it would still look as bad as ever, and I didn't know why. Then I discovered that it was the mos file that was derezzing the enhanced textures.
If you don't want to use a mos file then large textures are no problem. I've slowly gotten rid of my mos files over time as I upgraded each legacy aircraft's texture to higher resolution. For me, I'd rather have a high fidelity model most of the time, than seeing bullet hole decals appear on an aircraft that's seconds away from being destroyed anyway.
US Army, Major, Ret.
Service To The Line,
On The Line,
On Time
US Army Ordnance Corps.
Still busy unwrapping and texturing, so it's time for a (low res) gmax piccie of the engine/turbo/intercooler internals of the P-47 that are visible in CFS3 external view:
Gmax doesn't seem to be able to handle my large textures, so I had to downsize the texture setting. But I am having much fun playing with material values - and getting decent results in some places! Cowl flaps, oil cooler doors and intercooler waste gates are depicted in open position. BTW, the texturing isn't finished but for reference I already painted some parts.
ACC Member, ETO and PTO contributor & librarian
Fantastic work there Joost!!
CFS3 Battle of Britain Website: https://cfs3bob.wixsite.com/cfs3-bob
CFS3 ACC Member & ETO Expansion Group
As the textured poly count goes up, so Gmax starts puffing in its 2gb memory space - I simply can’t display a full, textured model without crashing. The solution was to make named selection sets of different sections of the model and only display what I needed to work on. Of course, if you switch all textures off in the viewport, or use wireframe view, you can show the lot.
Tom
__________________________________________________ ___________________________________________
Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding. Proverbs 4:7
From your tutorials I knew about selection sets but right now gmax can't even display a simple textured object at full resolution without crashing, lol.
I wonder if the material set-up also influences the memory load; Currently I have created two big multi-materials (ca. 22 different material settings) for all external objects (excl. VC), instead of multiple smaller multi-materials. At the time this felt more 'efficient' than a long list of various material combinations but I think this also taxes the system. Not being that PC-savy, it feels like the debate whether loading a multitude of small textures is better for your FPS than a single, large texture. In the end I would expect both methods to give the same amount of Mb loaded, or am I wrong?
Whatever the outcome of such a debate, the multimaterials use the same two 4096 textures but with different material settings, of course. I am using multimaterials to get as 'PBR' as possible Yes, I know CFS3 isn't PBR compatible but I seem to get decent results playing with values derived from that way of designing.
Anyway, you can do much more with the material settings in gmax than I have done with my models so far. We tinker a lot with _r and _s textures etc. but using appropriate settings in gmax also contribute to a convincing model!
ACC Member, ETO and PTO contributor & librarian
Outstanding detail once again Joost
Yea a model maker can do nice things regards material settings, but I wouldn't omit the s.dds, painters can do a lot of nice subtle work with those too!
John
(DR/ MAW/ ETO/ PTO Textures)
Keep it coming!
Now I am a bit confused: I went for a *_r.dds file with this model as I thought the stock bare metal P-47D-25 had one. I just checked and it turns out it has both a *_s.dds and a *_r.dds file. Yet the SDK states that you can't have both simultaneously! Both stock files do look quite similar. Now what?
ACC Member, ETO and PTO contributor & librarian
With Ankor's shaders, I believe the s dds is capable of creating the desired effect for any finish type, but worth experimenting with.
After a good night's rest I remembered why I choose the *_r.dds when I started this: Seeing both files in the stock P-47D-25 folder, I opened its .m3d with a hexeditor and found that the model uses the *_r.dds. My model also having a bare metal finish, I copied that choice. I don't know why there also is a *_s.dds included but it doesn't seem to be used by the model.
Is there a preference for either the *_r.dds or the *_s.dds and if so, could someone tell me why?
ACC Member, ETO and PTO contributor & librarian
The original intention was for r to map out the specular reflection patterns, and the s to determine the shadowing to simulate ambient occlusion. The naming convention is actually only relevant to help identify which is used for what.
AnKor's shaders take advantage of the r file's specular information to regulate the strength of the localized glossiness (great for highlighting chipped paint spots), but typically do their own shading through their self-shadowing routines.
The issue with using any sort of texture map to define the lighting qualities of a 3D object that moves through space like an airplane (versus trucks, buildings, trees, etc.) is that they are static, when the lighting is not. Paint in a dark to bright gradient along the top of a curved surface to emphasize the sun falling on it from above using an s file, and it will look wrong when the aircraft banks. Give the surface material a uniform brightness with AnKors shaders and they will automatically adjust the brightness gradient on the surface based on the relative direction of the sun.
AnKor's shaders also allow us to use normal maps to assist with the dynamic lighting in game. The intention here is to create the illusion of bumps using height difference information that changes the local direction vector of the light bouncing off an otherwise flat polygon surface. Again this is predetermined in a static texture map, so it may give erroneous results as the aircraft moves and turns in space, but if we're dealing with small features like panel lines and rivets the illusion works well enough most of the time.
US Army, Major, Ret.
Service To The Line,
On The Line,
On Time
US Army Ordnance Corps.
Thanks, that clarifies their function a bit - but for me it still doesn't answer why I should choose one over the other. After looking up what ambient occlusion actually does, it seems to me that both files are useful. Unfortunately CFS3 doesn't allow for both files to be used simultaneously...
BTW, the intake duct to the turbo on the P-47 model doesn't darken much when looking along it's length. Would a *_s. map help there?
This sounds to me an awful lot like how PBR texture maps are set up and what I was referring to in my earlier post; no 'painted on' shadows or highlights/gradients to simulate or emphazise shapes but let the shaders do their work. The difficulty and challenge for me lies in finding correct colours and material values for both the maps and gmax. That's why I have been looking at PBR a lot while doing this - hoping to find/create a translation to the CFS3 world.
Noted - so far parts seems mostly quite flat when lighting is coming from the 'opposite' or 'wrong' direction.
A second question that might be related to this came up: I have parts that should be shadowed by other parts but are lighted as if they receive direct light. What is causing this? I am not sure it is the modeling or not: I have placed 3D bolts in the cockpit (as separate objects placed against the canopy frame object) that should be in the shadow cast by the canopy frame and I have modeled ribs in the wheel wells as one single object (so no separate objects but part of the bay) that both shows this phenomenon...
ACC Member, ETO and PTO contributor & librarian
One of the experienced model builders will have to answer your questions.
US Army, Major, Ret.
Service To The Line,
On The Line,
On Time
US Army Ordnance Corps.
I didn't think we had ambient occlusion in CFS3 (which would be why the intake duct doesn't darken), where did you get that info Andy? If no ambient occlusion is possible, the intake duct may be an appropriate place to paint on some shading, since the times when the sun will be shining into it will usually be very fleeting, and the fact that when looking into a deep narrow hole when the sun is shining brightly on everything else, you really can't see into it.
A second question that might be related to this came up: I have parts that should be shadowed by other parts but are lighted as if they receive direct light. What is causing this? I am not sure it is the modeling or not: I have placed 3D bolts in the cockpit (as separate objects placed against the canopy frame object) that should be in the shadow cast by the canopy frame and I have modeled ribs in the wheel wells as one single object (so no separate objects but part of the bay) that both shows this phenomenon...
This may be a modeling problem, in which case I don't know the answer, but I have also seen this when something is wrong with a bump map. If the format is wrong or the colors are inverted you can get some strange results due to the bump map telling CFS3 that the surface is facing the wrong direction.
Going back to the s, and r.dds, I can only speak from an artistic point of view, I don't get into the technical part of it unless I really have too,( I think Andy covered that quite well anyway) but I would include both r.dds and s.dds in your model Joost. One reason, yes this P-47 did mainly use bare metal, but they were also camouflaged too. In past skins of this type I have simply blacked out the r.dds, and used it's s.dds for the none reflective camo.
My main use for the s.dds since Ankors shaders is for reflective adjustment, very subtle panel changes, weathering, and paint chipping. I've found the s.dds also works to make the bump map look a lot better too. I've no idea why, it just does!
Regards bump map textures, I usually use a neutral grey for my backgrounds, with no weathering or chipping, you don't need any of that in there, and don't forget, dark shades raise the bump, light shades lower.
Ankors shaders have changed the way it all works, I no longer paint any major shading onto my skins now.
The modeller has to get their reflectivity percentage just right, if it's too shiny, or too dull, it will effect the final texture quality in a big way. I'm not sure what percentage Steve set the Spitfire we are currently working on, but (for the sim), to me that was right on the money shine wise, gave me nice control via the s.dds. I know that in real life it was probably not as reflective, but we're talking a very old sim here.
Regards your intake, yea I still find the odd small bit that will need some manual shading lol
I've probably not been much help to you, as I've said it's just my artistic view, not technical.
You picked the hardest scheme to get right Joost, a wartime reflective bare metal skin is a pain to get to look natural in this sim, well it is for me!
John
(DR/ MAW/ ETO/ PTO Textures)
Keep it coming!
I was thinking the same thing here
Okay, I'll have to study that part a bit more and see what effects I can obtain using both those files!
I think we have a similar approach - I inspected some of your *.+nm.dds files: they look quite similar to mine. I fill my background with RGB 128,128,255 (seems to be the background colour in my filter) and 'bump' each object individually to have more control over depth/height or direction of the 'bump' (depending on the object's orientation on the map). In the Normal filter I use in PS it's also possible to give the "bump amount" a negative or positive value to make dents or bumps using the same base colour (though darker colours have a stronger effect indeed)
Story of my life...
ACC Member, ETO and PTO contributor & librarian
Here's an example of combining painted and bare metal surfaces.
Make sure the video is playing in HD, but the resolution is still far less than it was in game.
https://youtu.be/5UmnxaBJJuc
If you watch during the turns the ocean is lightly reflected off the weathered bare metal skin, but not the painted surfaces. Also, the highlights and shadows inside the engine cowling shift as the angles change.
This was done referencing an _s.dds file. As you can see the lightest tones are only at 12-16% brightness to produce a bare aluminum finish (but not museum mirror polished). The painted areas are at about 4-6% brightness.
Hex editing the m3d file must also be done to activate the appropriate drawing mode (adding FF in the 27th of 36 columns) so AnKors shaders can take full advantage of the reflectivity map. This provides better grading/shaping of the highlights on curved surfaces than the standard drawing mode. This is also how the glint on the glass and prop disc is activated.
US Army, Major, Ret.
Service To The Line,
On The Line,
On Time
US Army Ordnance Corps.
MM,
Great stuff.
Just watched the vid. Very nice the subtle differences between the shine of the metal to the lower sheen of the paint, a good shot is when the reflection moves up the metal sides to the painted anti-glare panel on top.
But even Ankors shaders and your variable shine/sheen application, can't change how bloody awful that original P47 looks...ha ha!!..I can't wait for Frosty's stunning model
Cheers
Shessi
Completely agree...
US Army, Major, Ret.
Service To The Line,
On The Line,
On Time
US Army Ordnance Corps.
The follow up video after Andy's also gives a good look at P47's overall. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwqTN5fhMR8
Cato said "Carthaginem esse delendam"
I say "Carthago iam diu deleta,sed enim Bellum Alium adhuc aedificandum est"
Cheers Andy!
John
(DR/ MAW/ ETO/ PTO Textures)
Keep it coming!
Members who have read this thread: 62
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks