Help And Opinions For Lynton And Barnstable

decapod · Post by **decapod** » Mon Dec 09, 2002 3:33 pm

hmmm - I was looking for something different to add to my next loco...
3D bolt heads would be OK if they are strictly a smoothed 4 sided pyramid with no base - that's only 1000 polys for 250 bolts (plus the opticians bills)

on a more serious note - it will be a few more years yet before the PC's and hardware will be up to that sort of detail and the compromises are really not that bad - it's just a matter of learning the painting techniques as well as the modelling ones.

One area I keep meaning to look at is bump mapping - the S files hint that it is supported and it may be a way that we can make rivets look better, but so far no modelling package supports it for MSTS and there are no examples - it would take a lot of experimentation.

The modelling techniques seem to have plateaued (sp?) recently - the poly counts of the freeware stuff went up high last year but have slipped back to a more reasonable level recently and models have retained similar detail. About the only thing left to add to models is working inside cylinders(Mike W?).

saddletank · Post by **saddletank** » Mon Dec 09, 2002 4:43 pm

The L&B is on my list of routes to build but it is tucked down in the pile a little way yet. It would have to be a team effort with someone supplying the stock and custom scenery items as I don't build models.

Kevin and I have discussed this briefly but nothing has been done about it yet.

sp762 · Post by **sp762** » Tue Dec 10, 2002 6:32 am

decapod wrote: About the only thing left to add to models is working inside cylinders(Mike W?).

Can't claim the idea - some of the new locos on Pat's impending bloockbuster already have inside motion!

kevmt · Post by **kevmt** » Tue Dec 10, 2002 7:33 am

Both my Dolgoch and Talyllyn models (released November 2001) both had simplified inside motion but I don't think anybody ever noticed it.

Cheers
Kevin

saddletank · Post by **saddletank** » Tue Dec 10, 2002 10:56 am

I saw it Kevin but didn't comment. I wasn't going to mention the locos built for Pat's route, Mike - but having seen cranked axles, working eccentrics and inside cylinders I am rather impressed - to put it mildly. I have no idea of the poly count but the open moors are the best place to run such beasts. On Highworth they would clog the game up too much.

sp762 · Post by **sp762** » Tue Dec 10, 2002 10:24 pm

Ooops - I hope I didn't let any felines out of containment units!

I haven't seen anything detailed - just a screen grab of a tween frame shot. However, on most locos I think it would be a case of 'only your dog can tell the difference' - it might be overkill.

The Manning Wardle does have a cranked driving axle, but only the inside con rods (as you can't see the other bits...)

(Hmmm really must finish that off.)

dcduncan · Post by **dcduncan** » Wed Dec 11, 2002 12:23 am

kevmt wrote:Both my Dolgoch and Talyllyn models (released November 2001) both had simplified inside motion but I don't think anybody ever noticed it.

Cheers
Kevin

I noticed it too, not at first I admit but I saw it and thought Wow that's good.

David

pitleyfalley · Post by **pitleyfalley** » Wed Dec 11, 2002 7:27 pm

Having spent many an hour underneath both of the aformentioned engines, to model the valve gear accuratley would require the patience of a god!

Dolgoch's is somewhat complicated, although is far more efficent in real life than either 1 Talyllyn [or for that matter 3 Sir Haydn) which are the only other TR locos with any real inside motion.

No.2 Has fletcher jennings patent valve motion, involving a complicated system where the eccentrics are double back, and the whole lot is folded in on itself! Hell to clean and work on! No .1 is less complicated, having (I believe) Allen straight link, or maybe Stephenson Link like No.3

Technical speel over with...

Christian

smudge5609 · Post by **smudge5609** » Fri Jan 03, 2003 10:04 pm

Hi All,
Thought i'd leave the motion side for now and have a play with some detail work on the cab. The cab is made out of several primitives with texture added. One problem with this is that there seems to be a trace of the outline of the primitive! - is there anyway around this?

Thanks for your time, again!

Chris

kevmt · Post by **kevmt** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 10:45 am

Chris, have you tried it in the game? It may be just a canvas rendering problem. I have seen similar things myself in Pro but they look ok in the game.

Cheers

Kevin

decapod · Post by **decapod** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 4:13 pm

Yes - it's usually a 3D Canvas rendering that puts on those edges (by wrapping pixels around from the opposite edge of the texture. They should go in the game.

good luck with the rest of it.

smudge5609 · Post by **smudge5609** » Sat Jan 04, 2003 6:25 pm

Hi All,

Thanks for all the help again. I never even thought about trying in MSTS!! Having a few problems with the fact that 3d canvas won't turn the .tga textures into .ace - but i knew it was going to be a challenge!!

Thanks again

Chris

smudge5609 · Post by **smudge5609** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 8:14 pm

I was looking at some of the narrow gauge models produced, such as the ffestiniog locos and noticed that the textures seem to react better in MSTS than the ones I have produced. They are not compressed textures I am using and they look fine in 3d Canvas. Are there any secret settings that would produce a better result? or is this the best I can get?

Any help would be much appreciated

Thanks again
Chris

decapod · Post by **decapod** » Sun Jan 05, 2003 9:39 pm

looks nice Chris.

I can see your problem there at the front of the loco, the texture seems to have blurred - this is due to "mipmapping"

You are using the same tool as Kevin used for the ffestiniog locos, his shape files should be identical to yours.

I suspect it may be down to you using a larger area on your texture for details - it may be an idea to take a look at one of his files with TGAtool2 and see how much of the ACE file he allocates to a cab side.
Yours look very large and it may be causing MSTS to "mip" early.

Alternatively, if you have a GEforce card - make sure the advanced directx settings for mipmaps are set to "best quality"

finally - look in your uncompressed S file for something like this:

textures ( 4
texture ( 0 0 -3 ff000000 )
texture ( 1 0 -3 ff000000 )
texture ( 2 0 -3 ff000000 )
texture ( 3 0 -3 ff000000 )
)

the -3 is the mip level bias - you could edit and make this -4 to see if that makes a difference.

kevmt · Post by **kevmt** » Mon Jan 06, 2003 11:22 am

Just to say that I don't use any secret settings, nearly all of my loco's are based on two 512x512 tga textures ( + occasionally a 64x64 one for the wheels).

Cheers

Kevin