Author Topic: POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 and 6 for testing (Read 158497 times)

aldo_14 · **Reply #40 on:** August 18, 2004, 04:44:05 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Styxx
Hm, are your objects named properly? And do they have a material that has a bitmap texture on the Diffuse slot?

Me?

Re 1/ I believe so. Main hull should be detail0, yes? (no other objects at the me)

2/ Yup. Although they also have bmp spec / bump / glow / opacity maps specified as well.

Omni - that looks like the effect I get on submodels whenever converting a model 'normally' - i.e. the main hull will be shaded fine, but the subobjects (turrets, lods, debris) have that bizarre shaded appearance. Are the nacelles correctly shaded, perchance?

Styxx · **Reply #41 on:** August 18, 2004, 04:58:15 pm

Nope, main hull should be "detail-0".

karajorma · **Reply #42 on:** August 18, 2004, 05:06:25 pm

Gave it a try with the model supplied on MAX 6 and it seemed to work fine there. I'll try one of my own models later.

aldo_14 · **Reply #43 on:** August 18, 2004, 05:17:22 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Styxx
Nope, main hull should be "detail-0".

ah......baws

Bingo, then. Converted, shading seems a bit off, though. I'm going to double check the smoothing on the max model itself, make sure it's ok.

EDIT; nope. Shading seems off...hard to describe how, but the model in modelview (with no textures shown, i.e.just the bare model) is almost completely the one colour, with some very small, very light 'strips' on a small number of faces.

Oh, and hows the size calculated? Is it just 1 max unit = 1m?

Styxx · **Reply #44 on:** August 18, 2004, 05:26:38 pm

Yep, size is in MAX units.

aldo_14 · **Reply #45 on:** August 18, 2004, 05:31:02 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Styxx
Yep, size is in MAX units.

Woot... I have a leviathan sized fighter+pilot

Omniscaper · **Reply #46 on:** August 18, 2004, 05:41:52 pm

Bollocks, not the submodel shading bug again!!!

The wierd part is, the main hull is the parent object. The nacelles seem to be shaded fine as one of the subobjects. I tried reversing the order and I still get the saame results. I'm now gonna check the model for intersections and other closed meshes within.

aldo_14 · **Reply #47 on:** August 18, 2004, 05:54:42 pm

Apologies for the filesize, didn;t want to lose any detail so didn't compress.

You can see the 'oddness' there. It's not too bad (actually, the cockpit subobject - which is hidden from view - is better shaded in the max2pof one). It's not so much 'bad' as just a bit odd.

That said, not viewed this in FS2 yet, so can;t make a proper visual judgement.

Styxx · **Reply #48 on:** August 18, 2004, 06:17:54 pm

It is ver bad, yes. It ruins the look inside FS2. I'm working on it.

Night Hammer · **Reply #49 on:** August 18, 2004, 06:19:38 pm

Ok Im dumb, what exactly is MAX and why is it so handy or why does everyone want it?

aldo_14 · **Reply #50 on:** August 18, 2004, 06:23:39 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Night Hammer
Ok Im dumb, what exactly is MAX and why is it so handy or why does everyone want it?

3ds max. Simply the best modelling programme there is*.

And anything which means we don't need to use *hack, spit* Truespace can only be a good thing

*expects arguements from LW people.

Hippo · **Reply #51 on:** August 18, 2004, 07:01:37 pm

Odd... I had no problem converting the sample... But, now when i try to convert another model, it won't load in FRED...

The model worked before as a POF (not made by me), and i was enlarging it to the correct scale, but i can't get it to go back to a POF... (a pof that works at least)... I know i named it right, and i've even tried unselecting the checkboxes for everything BUT detail levels, (since all i have is the detail, no other elements yet)...

gah... I'd post an image, but my ports are giving me crap...

Omniscaper · **Reply #52 on:** August 18, 2004, 08:21:44 pm

You know, it seems to me that the normals are reversed in it's shading. When I view it in Freespace tech room, the dark side is on top and the highlights are on the bottom.

Either way I understand that this pluggin is at its beta phase and I have high hopes for its potential.

I do question whether or not Freespace supports smoothgroups the way MAX does. As models get more and more complex, I believe the use of smooth groups will be essential. I'd rather not seperate the smoothgroups into independent meshes or to divide a single texture among multiple material ID's.

jdjtcagle · **Reply #53 on:** August 18, 2004, 08:25:21 pm

This is too cool, Styxx

Bobboau · **Reply #54 on:** August 18, 2004, 08:40:33 pm

FS suports smooth groupes in exactly the same way max does

Styxx · **Reply #55 on:** August 18, 2004, 09:02:10 pm

Yeah, more or less. The thing is, I'm translating the multiple normals per vertex from MAX directly into the POF (flipping the Y and Z axis, as required), I double and triple-checked the values by reloading the POF with my POF loader, but they just won't show the normals correctly.

Omniscaper · **Reply #56 on:** August 18, 2004, 09:11:28 pm

If thats the case, then Styxx's plugin is the only tool thats capable of utilizing it. Truespace kills that function. If I understand this correctly, the only way to get the smoothgroups to work in TS is to have a unique corresponding material for each smooth group. 3dsmax allows multiple smoothgroups independent of materials.

Bobboau · **Reply #57 on:** August 18, 2004, 10:33:40 pm

you could just take the normals of the polys and average them at each point, but only takeing into acount normals from other polies that are in the same smooth group

Styxx · **Reply #58 on:** August 18, 2004, 10:54:44 pm

No, that's not the problem - I think I found it now. I was considering the normal indexes for each face on a per-vertex basis when, apparently, the indexes are an absolute number for all normals (which is ridiculous considering the way the normals are stored). Gotta figure out the best way to find the correct index now...

The reason my debugging was showing the correct data is because I interpreted it while reading the same way I interpreted it when writing... But Freespace 2 interprets it in a different way, and so does Modelview. I've checked some original FS2 models and noticed normal indexes on the 200 and above range, which would be ridiculous if it was on a per-vertex basis, so I noticed it had to be absolute... What a mess.

Bobboau · **Reply #59 on:** August 18, 2004, 10:59:46 pm

as I said, toataly freaking insaine beond all comprehention.

do you see why I want to totaly rebuild this debacle.

News:

Author Topic: POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 and 6 for testing (Read 158497 times)

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing

POF exporter for MAX - Need people with MAX 4, 5 or 6 for testing