[Kolgena]

Hmm.

Aside from the normals problem that definitely exists right now, there seems to be some gimpy texturing going on where the diagonal surfaces join the corner parts to the center of the container. Looks quite stretched to me.

Also, I'm not quite sure I follow on how to put the microbevels on the normal map. I don't mean bevels on the plates on the textures. I mean bevels on the corners/edges of the geometry. It's being faked right now by the normal maps, but you notice that it isn't occluded properly at far corners (like POM would do), so it wouldn't be as effective as a dozen extra polies to model in the edge bevels.

[Galemp]

So add the dozen extra polies. You can certainly afford it.

[ION3]

It's being faked right now by the normal maps, but you notice that it isn't occluded properly at far corners (like POM would do)

I can't quite follow you. Which edges of the geometry are we talking about?

What do you mean with occluding?  And what is POM? What do you mean with a far corner? Like when seeing the container from afar? Also, could the problem be the currently very bad shape of the normal map?

some gimpy texturing going on... [] looks quite stretched to me.

 Are you talking about the image in the first post or the included file in my last update? Cause i redid the whole UV-mapping in between.

[Water]

You can spend more polys on the edge corners to catch the light. On your version each of those blocks with nine dots = 18 polys.

[ION3]

I you look at the textures, there's actually on of those black, non-reflective seams right at the edges. I tried some experiments with normalmapping jesterday and i guess you're definitely right in that a bevel would be needed to get those reflections right.

Regarding the normalmapping problem:

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=559283

http://www.torquepowered.com/community/forums/viewthread/99887/

http://www.bencloward.com/tutorials_normal_maps10.shtml

In all of these links there's mention of a possible fix for it. There are mentions of engine side fixes, but also of a fix in the model exporter. Maybe smething similar could be implemented in PCS2?

[Water]

I you look at the textures, there's actually on of those black, non-reflective seams right at the edges.

In all of these links there's mention of a possible fix for it. There are mentions of engine side fixes, but also of a fix in the model exporter. Maybe smething similar could be implemented in PCS2?

Those black seams are on a 128x512 texture from about 1999. What you want to do, is think about what they might have done if they had used a larger 512x512 texture. Thing is they had to sell the model using just a small diffuse map, you on the other hand have a bit more choice with normal and shine maps, more polys and larger textures.

There really isn't a normal map problem. What you see in Blender with the inverted uv's is not what you see in FS. There are issues with seams, but that's across all applications. The standard rule for Hi poly > Lo poly baking is hide the seams as much as possible, and try not to have mirrored uv's next to each other. If you are using photoshop to create normal maps then you have a bit more choice.

Don't let the uv part put you off.

A good method is to sort the low poly model first, including smoothing. Normal maps and smoothing work together.
Then unwrap, either 512² or 1024² The format of the current unwrap is a bit limiting, preventing you from getting much more detail in the map. Blender's unwrap tools are very good.

Create a hi poly version for baking OR use photoshop to create the normal map
A third way is to use the high poly for the larger details and photoshop for the smaller details.

Then use the normal map as a guide to create the diffuse texture.

An example, basic mesh


Normal map using xNormal for hi>lo and hight map to normal map. Both combined in Gimp to create one map. Even without the diffuse map it looks half way done already.


This is some of the hipoly parts. The colour coding is to help with the baking. Only one of each duplicated item is baked, since they all share the same texture space. The same sort of thing you would do for the container. A large amount of the container map is repeated to cut the texture space to the bare minimum.


XNormal has a some tools to convert normal map into a sort of fake ao. (Don't use a greyscale version of the normal map directly in the diffuse as it'll fight against what the normal map is tying to achieve) After that it's a case of adding colour and dirt. Having the normal map helps a lot with the texturing. Blender can also create an AO map to lightly shade the crevices.

[ION3]

What you see in Blender with the inverted uv's is not what you see in FS

That's good. I came to that conclusion from reading other threads around here. I suggest adding it to the tutorials that are floating around somwhere in the forum.

There are issues with seams, but that's across all applications.

If the model and normalmap are done right there shouldn't be any seams as far as i know. But people often have problems creating such "seamless" normal maps. Ore is there something else going on?

I'm currently not planning to make new diffuse, glow and shine textures, but we'll see. I did some changes to them, though. Currently I'm working on a new normal map using baking.

[blowfish]

Err, there seem to be a lot of subdivided edges in your mesh which should be merged to save polygons.

[ION3]

there seem to be a lot of subdivided edges in your mesh which should be merged to save polygons

I already waited for that one ^^

Three reasons why not:

1. Vertex lighting quality for those who still use it.

2. The textures have some weird stretching which can be corrected that way. (granted, not in all cases)

3. The amount of polys doesn't change much if they are merged.



But I definitely see your point.

[Vasudan Admiral]

I'd very strongly recommend merging co-planar faces, yeah.
1) Anyone still on vertex lighting has far bigger problems than an ever so slightly less cool lighting setup on one particular cargo crate, so definitely don't worry about that - they would much prefer maximum efficiency polygon wise anyway.

2) Any stretching I would say should be corrected on the texture, and remaking this particular texture should be pretty easy and good practice. I'd highly recommend it.

3) The amount of polys difference does matter for a mass-used-object like a cargo container since it's #-extra-polys * #-of-containers in-game. Well spent polys are fine but co-planar ones aren't really well spent. So, I'd say take those extra polys and make some cool feature out of the slanted connections between the extruded corner 3 polys of each corner of the container. They've always been really bland and in need of greeble-love!

[ION3]

3 polys of each corner of the container

???

edit: got it

I'll do some vertex lighting tests to see how it looks ingame.