There has GOT to be a better way...

Anything to do with Aircraft Design, FSDS, G Max, Aircraft Animator, SDL Edit, etc. Novice or skilled - stop here & learn!

There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Daycab » Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:16 pm

Man, this is getting tedious.  This is after a couple hours of work too!  Isn't there some way to do this without all of the little stray polygons all over the place?  :P

daycab

Image
User avatar
Daycab
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:39 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Brett_Henderson » Sun Sep 27, 2009 3:45 pm

Are you trying to map the wings and fuselage, all at once.. with an unwrap no less ? ?


Man.. I don't think that can be done by a human  :D

Even a symetrical, tubular fuselage presents problems where things converge.. like the aft-end and nose.

Break it up into pieces and experiment with mapping each part with just a normal, planar UVW. Then do a mesh select (or split the fuselage longitudinally into two parts), so that you can map each side independently.
Brett_Henderson
Major
Major
 
Posts: 3403
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:09 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Daycab » Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:06 pm

The entire fuselage wasn't like this, just stray pieces here and there...
User avatar
Daycab
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:39 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Brett_Henderson » Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:53 pm

The entire fuselage wasn't like this, just stray pieces here and there...


I know (I think).. but that looks like an unwrap of a very complex part.. Picture what it would look like, if you tried to represent the entire surface in 2 dimensions. Try selecting all the wing polygons and detaching them into their own part(s)...
Last edited by Brett_Henderson on Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Brett_Henderson
Major
Major
 
Posts: 3403
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:09 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Daycab » Sun Sep 27, 2009 9:18 pm

Can I use more than one UVW Unwrap?  I have been using Flatten Mapping and getting what is above.  If I use more than one modifier, I can use normal mapping and do Front/Back and Left/Right to get a much cleaner  map...

Back/Front Mapping

Image

Top/Bottom Mapping

Image

daycab
User avatar
Daycab
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:39 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Daycab » Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:18 am

Box mapping is my friend... :)

Image
User avatar
Daycab
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:39 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Brett_Henderson » Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:56 am

There are as many ways to do this, as there are people doing it  :D

The trick is to get the bitmap to work with the mapping (obviously).

My advice is to have several parts (sometimes even making the fuselage into several part).

You'll start getting a feel for it as you experiment.. no matter what is published; there's really only one way to learn this stuff..  practice !
Brett_Henderson
Major
Major
 
Posts: 3403
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:09 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Daycab » Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:26 pm

Ok, I'm still having problems with this.  :P

In trying to apply my textures, I did the following:

I mapped them to the part in Max, saved it and exported it as an x-file.  Then I converted it to a mdl file and put it into the Extra folder.  No problem here...

To apply the texture, I created the map as a 2048x2048 bmp.  Then I used the Nvidia Plugin to convert it to a .dds, changed the name to Extra300s_T and dropped it in the texture folder.  No deal.  I just got a black plane again.

As an alternative, I used DXTbmp to convert it to a DXT5 file, then used Imagetool to convert it to a .dds, renamed it and moved it to the texture folder.  Still no joy...  :(

Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what I am doing wrong?


daycab
User avatar
Daycab
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:39 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Brett_Henderson » Mon Sep 28, 2009 10:02 pm

First thing that comes to mind, is that there might be a filename issue. You've already got a texture to show up, so you've got that part down.

Are the filenames  EXACTLY the same as the mapped files ? Are there any regular bitmaps lingering in the texture folder (like the one you used during mapping) ?
Brett_Henderson
Major
Major
 
Posts: 3403
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:09 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Daycab » Mon Sep 28, 2009 11:15 pm

Well I wish I knew what I did right before...  ::)
User avatar
Daycab
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:39 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Brett_Henderson » Tue Sep 29, 2009 5:53 am

If it's a compression type (DXT5), and file type (DDS), that FSX recognizes.. and it's of perfect, binary dimensions.. and the pre-extension filename is exactly the same as the diffuse bitmap used in the material.. and it's in the texture folder... it WILL show up.

Now, ther are probably Max settings that GMAX does not have, so it could be something I'm not familiar with..

Check with the guys at the www.freeflightdesign.com forum  :)
Brett_Henderson
Major
Major
 
Posts: 3403
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:09 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Daycab » Wed Sep 30, 2009 9:27 pm

Ok, so I figured out what I was doing wrong.
User avatar
Daycab
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:39 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Brett_Henderson » Wed Sep 30, 2009 9:42 pm

I'd have to see a screenshot of the mapping, and a screenshot of the bitmap.
Brett_Henderson
Major
Major
 
Posts: 3403
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:09 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Daycab » Wed Sep 30, 2009 9:59 pm

Here they are together.
Last edited by Daycab on Wed Sep 30, 2009 10:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Daycab
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:39 am

Re: There has GOT to be a better way...

Postby Brett_Henderson » Thu Oct 01, 2009 6:00 am

Yeah.. that's what I needed to see.

OK.. this is where the differences between Max and Gmax might come into play.. but I think it's pretty close.

Try mapping each part (or group of polygons) individually with  just the UVW (no unwrap).

-Select a part (or mesh select a group of polygons.. ie a fuselagge or wing half), and add a UVW.

--Expand the UVW and select the gizmo

---Move and resize the GIZMO until the bitmap is aligned to just THAT part (or selected polygons)

(In Gmax..if it is selected polygons, you'll need to collapse the UVW before selecting other polygos (like the other half).

Your bitmap does not need the unwrap option, because it's not designed to be "wrapped" around a part.

You might find that as you add details (like rivets), you might need to use an unwrap, to keep details from "stretching".. But from the looks of your map. it looks like you've got that taken care of. It looks like you've selected polygons in groups that will map (the fuselage for example) from top/bottom and both sides.
Brett_Henderson
Major
Major
 
Posts: 3403
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 7:09 am

Next

Return to Aircraft & 3D Design

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 547 guests