FSX Best roadmap for new model

[SierraB]

Hello developers

After some month of work I finally consider my model finished for now. It's my very first modelling experience, but please tell me what you think and if you spot any issues anytime tell them too.

The plan is to make a light-weight model, with as less polys as possible, but as many details as necessary. (I guess that's what every developer is after anyway)

So for now I have about 17000 faces and 11500 vertices, BUT that is without any texturing or mapping..
Included in the numbers are several versions like pax and ambulance interiour and float skids, water tank and a spray beam.


Now, I'm kinda stuck what to do next. And especially how.

I think the main procedure would be to 1. map the model, 2. create texture sheets, 3. animations.

However, I feel pretty unsecure about how to do it best for best performance in the sim.


What is your usual workflow for a model from this point?

When do you seperate interiour and exteriour model and how to?

Is it better to use few large texture sheets (2048x2048) or several smaller ones (1024x1024)?
Should animated parts be put on very small texture sheets for minimum loading time?

Is the FPS hit of xml gauges really worth modelling the cockpit in 3D?



Many questions and for sure not the last ones, but I hope you can give me some hints and tricks from your enormous experience

Best regards,
Steven

 

[hairyspin]

Before doing anything else, get the model exported to the sim: that will tell you straight away what needs to be done next. Once it's exporting properly, get mapping. I'd leave modelling the VC until the exterior is properly mapped and probably to just a few 2048 textures. Then you can animate it.

Why not try 3D modelling the cockpit? 2D panels are rather old-fashioned imo, and it's not too hard to model gauges and levers. Unless you're building an AB412, there'll still be lots of dials and needles to do. The VC is a separate model in FSX (usually): you might clone the parts of the external model seen from the cockpit for the VC model, then refine and detail from there

Very tidy mesh, btw!

 

[SierraB]

Thanks Hairyspin for your answer!
Jep, every single vertex is "hand-placed"

Exporting works just fine without any error at all. So I'll have to start mapping, although I'm really afraid of this task

You mean bigger 2048 textures are in general better than many smaller ones, correct?

Concerning the 3D gauges I really can't decide...I like the flexibility in xml gauges, you can replace them, modify them etc. 3D is fixed. No modification after the model is compiled...

Greetings,
Steven

 

[Paul Domingue]

Steven, very nice model for your first one. I'll have to agree with hairyspin, 3d gauges are the way to go. They are much more realistic and you can modify the gauges when ever you want since you have the mesh. You can save 3d gauges in a collection for use in other models and for me the best part about 3d gauges is they do not require anywhere near as much XML programing as 2d gauges.

 

[hairyspin]

You can get more detail on to a single 2048 texture than a 1024, so detailing a model is easier if an entire fuselage is mapped to one texture instead of across four separate ones. There are other things you can do to improve framerates, such as mapping lots of small non-animated bits on the same texture sheet. Then attach them together: the sim can happily handle lots of screwheads and bolts in the VC as a single object, subject to the 64K texture vertex limit (how many screwheads?) That said, I just mapped all my objects, animated and static, to a few 2048 textures and framerates are just fine.

Mapping is like modelling: terrifying to start with but with some practice you'll get the hang of it. You'll find some guides in the Wiki, including a series on Gmax mapping in particular.

 

[SierraB]

@Paul Domingue : Thanks Paul, you mentioned some quite motivating aspects on 3D gauges

@hairyspin : OK, first thing I'll take with me is to use few large textures. Theoretically, attaching all non-animated parts together to one object should give the best performance I guess. But this isn't advisable, because then you should be 100% sure you won't edit your model anymore, correct?

I will start looking through the tutorials tomorrow. Keep the hints coming, your help is really appreciated!

 

[capt_x]

Theoretically, attaching all non-animated parts together to one object should give the best performance I guess. But this isn't advisable, because then you should be 100% sure you won't edit your model anymore, correct?

You don't have to do that. The compiler (XToMdl) already does it automatically: all non animated/attached parts that share the same material are merged into one object, so it's 1 material = 1 object. You can keep your objects separate.

 

[SierraB]

@capt_x : Thanks for your help, Felix! I suppose XtoMDL is internally used whenever I export from Gmax to my .mdl file? So I don't have to care about the objects, aslong as they share the same material.

What about animated parts like rotor blades, doors etc - can I put them onto the large textures as well or should they be placed on smaller ones seperately?

EDIT:
Found the answer in another thread by Vitus

The reason is simple: instead of loading one huge 4096^2 texture (that's 16MB!) 50 times to the memory, different and small 256^2 (that's 65kB) or 512^2 textures (that's 257kB) maps are loaded to the memory.

Bottom line:
For FSX it appears to be good practice to use HUGE 4096^2 textures for all STATIC parts. For animated parts it is better to use smaller maps - maybe even one map for each object (as it doesn't seam to make any difference).

Conclusion:
My plan is to use
- one 2048 sheet for the complete static exteriour
- one 2048 sheet for everything static in the interiour (floor, console, panel, walls etc)
- one 1024 sheet for all the objects that can be turned on/off (visible/invisible) like the seating, water tank, ambulant equipment etc.
- many small textures for every animated part (doors, controls, blades etc.)

I want to try to keep it easy for painters with convenient naming and labels.
What's your thoughts?


Steven

 

[capt_x]

Hello Steven,

it is not uncommon to have repaint-able parts (mainly the fuselage) on one sheet and the rest (rotor, skids, interior, etc) on another sheet that will stay in a "common" texture folder. But if you want to put everything in one texture, then that doesn't matter. When squeezing everything onto one sheet, just remember to keep the same (good) resolution for the more visible parts of your model.

 

[SierraB]

Thanks, Felix!
I'm actually not that concerned about where to put the repaint-able parts, but more about how to structure them for best performance. So I tend to put all animated parts on small textures.

Today I started mapping ...and have my first problem here:

The gizmo for the map isn't equal in size, although I typed in 10x10. Is this because of some scaling issues?
I read about scale, transform reset, xform etc, but whenever I clicked on these buttons absolutely nothing ever changed on my model...

Any ideas?

Steven

 

[Paul Domingue]

Delete the UVW Mapping and Mesh Select. Go to the Utilities Tab (little hammer) and select Reset XForm then click on Reset Selected at the bottom. Then collapse the stack and add the Mesh Select and UVW Mapping modifiers back to the stack and all should be well.

 

[SierraB]

Great, this did the trick
Btw, do the transform and scale reset buttons on the Hierarchy tab have any noticable effect??


Gosh..everywhere you see beautiful models beeing mapped and having textures applied in almost no time and I'm just sitting here having no clue how to map this friggin curvy fuselage....

Much much respect to all the artists out there!

 

[Paul Domingue]

Don't worry you will get the hang of it. I also went through the same frustrations as well as many others here but once you get done with this first model you will be answering questions for the next generation of modelers. Look at this thread. http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/more-uv-mapping-bewilderment-how.433399/ It's actually just a little further down this page.

 

[SierraB]

Thank you kindly for the motivating words, Paul

I feel like I've read thousands of FSDeveloper threads, and though there is always one that I haven't read yet Thanks for the tip!

 

[hairyspin]

... do the transform and scale reset buttons on the Hierarchy tab have any noticable effect??

Yes, they do; but Gmax doesn't always know the physical size of the object: if it was built with splines and cross-section/surface modelling this is often a problem. Reset XForm gives Gmax an accurate handle on any object, as well as resetting scale and the object's pivot. I had exactly the same problem as you with my first model and hadn't a clue what was wrong: Reset XForm put all right again.

Gosh..everywhere you see beautiful models being mapped and having textures applied in almost no time and I'm just sitting here having no clue how to map this friggin curvy fuselage....

You think it takes us no time? lol That series I mentioned above will step you through it, including mapping curvy fuselages. Keep going!

 

[SierraB]

Well, of course it's not a 5 minutes task for you either. I actually really hope so I rather meant one can barely see which effort is needed for texturing, unless you try it yourself.

Your tut is already on my drive and much appreciated!!

 

[SierraB]

Ok, here is my first serious attempt on the fuselage mapping. I know painters will hate me for this structure, but it's a beginning...

I need to think about the texture sheet..either way scale the parts up to make better usage of the space or putting interior parts in between.

Greetings,
Steven

 

[hairyspin]

That's not a bad start. I'd rethink the nose mapping as there's obvious stretching in front of the windscreen and directly underneath that on the underside, plus the front of the gearbox housing(?). These areas might be better mapped separately, but it's a great deal better than my first efforts!

Your mapping size could be reduced a little to fill up the texture space more but it's not far off. Bear in mind there's no external stores accounted for so far, nor the smaller details shown in the original screenshots in your first post.

Keep going!

 

[Heretic]

Map the doors alongside with the fuselage or the mob of angry painters in front of your house will be even larger!

 

[SierraB]

Thank you for your feedback, hairyspin and Heretic!

Hard to compromise on performance, resolution and painters' satisfaction..

Concerning the doors: When they are all put onto one 2048^2 texture and all 6 beeing animated (6 drawcalls + 1 drawcall Fuselage)- does this mean that FSX would load the big texture 7 times everytime?
Putting the doors on a extra 1024^2 sheet would safe a lot then, but the painters' mob would probably have better, more convincing arguments in their hands I guess