FSX Problem with Color or Texture Blending

[kmanning]

Hi Anro or Gary,
I'm not sure which one of you would know but maybe both of you can explain and give me some advice on what I may be doing wrong. I have my new KPVD terminal installed into FSX, and different sections of the building is blending, or blends in too much with other areas of the building. See the images Below:

In this image, the areas I have circled shows where the blending is taking place. This building is actually about 14 ft. from the main terminal building, but in this photo, there is no depth and you cannot distinguish the difference between the 2 buildings. It looks as though the building is flushed with the main building and has no edges, but these edges were drawn in Sketchup and you can see the depth.

In this image at a higher angle, you can see how this building protrudes out from the main building but there's still problems with the blending in the areas I have circled.

This is another image from the ground and you can still see how the building that protrudes out still blends with the main building, making it look as though this building is flushed with the main building.

From this angle, you can see that this building protrudes out from the main building shown by the arrow.


Is there something I'm doing wrong, either in Sketchup or MCX, that's causing this blending? Some of these are colors and some are textures selected in the Paintbuck in Sketcup. I was wondering, am I supposed to make my textures using something like Gimp before importing them into MCX, or do I just do it from Sketchup? Either I'm doing something wrong or one or both softwares are not capable of transferring or converting real good textures. It looks great in Sketchup. But after I import them into MCX, the textures look nothing like it did in Sketchup. I want my models to come out looking brilliant as it did in Sketchup It has a cartoonish appearance about it. So, is there something I need to do or correct?

Ken.

 

[GaryGB]

Hi Ken:

Please post screenshots of the above 3D model in Sketchup showing the same 2 views as the last 2 FSX views shown above.

When you take the 2 screenshots in Sketchup, turn off Edges and Profiles via:

Sketchup Menu > View > Edge Style > un-check both Edges and Profiles

GaryGB

 

[arno]

Hi,

Also check that the material doesn't have "assume vertical normal" set. That would influence the lighting calculation.

 

[kmanning]

Hi Gary,
Here's the screenshot from Sketchup. Since I've unchecked both edges and profiles, now it looks the same as it appeared in MCX.

Ken.

 

[kmanning]

Hi,

Also check that the material doesn't have "assume vertical normal" set. That would influence the lighting calculation.

How do I find out if "assume vertical normal is set?

Ken.

 

[arno]

You can see it in the material editor. Also check if your polygons have normals defined.

 

[=rk=]

The issue is the consequence of using polygon color. There is no shading, no gradation and yes, colored polygons do look cartoonish, using RGB values there are only 16777216 possible colors to chose from. No amount of vertical normal assumption, or definition, or edge unticking for that matter, is going to substitute for a properly shaded or baked photographic style texture. Simply compare the terminal model to the surface of the jetway, which has been textured, to see a stark example of the difference.

You want to be working on something like this and if you get good enough, maybe somebody will make a video of your simulator graphics that is exciting enough to dance to:

I hope you can agree that even a square box textured this way will be striking and dramatic. This post is useful despite the fact it was written for X-Plane, because it shows properly textured models within the Sketchup interface and also within the simulator.

https://www.flightsim.com/vbfs/content.php?15589-Freeware-Development-In-X-Plane&styleid=26

 

[arno]

Even with colors the polygon normals will result in different lighting for polygons facing in different directions. Unless Sketchup does something weird with the normals.

 

[=rk=]

Oh, no argument there Arno and Sketchup provides ready tools to identify normal orientation and is just as willing to allow the user to ignore those orientations. However, reversals occur when one changes drawing direction, or extrudes, etc., meaning there are specific transitions that generate them, which we're not likely to see in this type of shape. As an example, if Ken had extruded his window plane inward, to create the impression of a sill, that sill could very likely be reversed in orientation to the polygons of the window and wall planes.
Another occasion that generates reversed polygons is when a plane is intersected or broken. Sketchup automatically triangulates a rectangular plane into two triangles with identical orientation. However, were you to section the plane, as an example, to cut windows into a hangar door, the automatically generated triangulations will not be in alignment as SU would have no way of knowing which orientation is the priority. In such a situation, the mixed normals will render thusly:

Bear in mind that the above picture was captured of a model rendered with a well proportioned and properly shaded photo style texture. Altogether, it's my suggestion that these types of scenarios are somewhat advanced beyond the task of identifying the different types of polyon mappings and applying the appropriate ones.

 

[arno]

To keep things simple. If you enable the display of normals in MCX, what do you see? There should be small red lines showing the direction of the polygons.

 

[GaryGB]

Hi Ken:

Please attach- / link to- a ZIP of the above Sketchup 3D model in KMZ file format, so we can perform a proper analysis here.


PS: Please tell us which numeric version of Sketchup was used to create the above 3D model.

Please also tell us whether the walls of the building in that 3D model were textured with one of Sketchup's default "Materials", and if so, which one.

Additionally, since newer versions of Sketchup have added additional varieties of texture "Materials", we need to identify whether the "texture" used on that wall is a default "color" Material, a default fixed-size "tile-able" Material, or a custom (imported) texture image.


In the Sketchup work-space, with that 3D model loaded:

1.) Materials dialog > {Select tab} > Pick-list > choose "In Model" Material library (Home Icon)

2.) 'Select' one of the wall Faces in question

3.) Sketchup Icon Bar > Left Mouse click on Paint Bucket Tool

a.) Hold down <Alt> key > Left Mouse click Paint Bucket on 'Selected' wall Face

4.) In Materials dialog > {Select tab} > Pick-list > note the 'Selected' "In Model" Material

a.) Right-click on the 'Selected' "In Model" Material

NOTE: If the resulting pop-up context menu does NOT offer:

* Export Texture Image

...or:

* Edit Texture Image...


...then the 'Selected' Material is NOT a:

* default default "color" Material

...or a:

* default fixed-size "tile-able" Material


...and is instead either a:

* default fixed-size "tile-able" Material converted to Texture image Material via "Make Unique Texture"

...or a:

* custom (Imported) Texture image

5.) If you can ID which Material is used on the wall faces in question, please tell us what it is.


Thanks in advance for your reply making the above 3D model available for analysis.

GaryGB

 

[GaryGB]

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/problem-with-color-or-texture-blending.441296/#post-783677

To keep things simple. If you enable the display of normals in MCX, what do you see? There should be small red lines showing the direction of the polygons.

Hi Arno:

I agree that it could help "keep things simple" for purposes of this discussion to import the 3D model in question into MCX; hopefully Ken will provide the requested Sketchup KMZ file of that 3D model in question to be analyzed in MCX.


FYI: An alternate method to display Normals for Faces in Sketchup (regardless of Material 'library' type those Faces are textured with):

1.) Install a Ruby plugin script by Tak2hata: "Draw Slope Normals.rb" from:

http://sketchucation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=456037#p456037

https://sketchucation.com/pluginstore?pln=draw_slope_normals

2.) Sketchup Menu > Plugins > Draw Slope Normals > Draw Slope Vectors on Selected Faces > Set Length of Arrows > [OK]

3.) Observe the Black arrow pointing in direction of Slope Vectors (...IIUC, this shows "Normals" for a 'Selected' Face).


BTW: Arno, would you please be so kind as to confirm whether, in Sketchup, if "Make Unique Texture" is implemented for a Material library type mapped to a Face, including any:

* Sketchup default default "color" Material

* Sketchup default fixed-size "tile-able" Material

* Sketchup Imported "custom" Texture image file

...IIUC, when imported into MCX, the individual Material texture images with distortions of the source image 'baked-in' and UVW-mapped to the Face, are already in a format that MCX can use without additional processing to "Burn material colors into textures" when one wishes to create a texture sheet (aka "Texture Atlas") to be output via the MCX Draw Call Minimizer ?

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=ModelConverterX#Burn_material_colors_into_textures

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/burn-material-colors-into-textures.435060/



If so, one may more easily implement texture image enhancement for any Material via Bill Womack's methods:

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/my-object-is-not-working-in-mcx.439679/page-4

Otherwise, one could perhaps, instead of utilizing the Sketchup built-in "Make Unique Texture" feature, use Aerilius' plugin Ruby Script: Make Unique Texture ++" to prepare Texture Materials prior to import into MCX ...so that they do not have the known 'non-industry-standard' Sketchup UVW mapping coordinate type issues:

"The default "Make Unique texture" in SketchUp serves for

• making a texture on a face independent from all other materials/faces
• cropping a texture to the face
• baking any UV distortion into the image file; thus the resulting texture pins are arranged in a rectangle (especially for exporters that don't support distortion)

This Plugin resolves several of the built-in tool's limits. It uses a higher quality algorithm (bicubic), crops to the best fitting bounding box and allows batch processing of more than one face."

http://sketchucation.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=367210#p367210

https://sketchucation.com/pluginstore?pln=ae_MakeUnique



PS: Alternatively, after all Materials are 'made unique', one could utilize this specialized "Rendering" application plugin to implement "Ambient Occlusion" (aka "AO") into one's 3D model from within Sketchup:

https://extensions.sketchup.com/en/content/ambientocclusion-pro

< It would be wonderful if MCX implemented a "simple" version of this in the future ! >

GaryGB

 

[tgibson]

I'm not sure what you are expecting to see. You have polygons with the exact same orientation, with the exact same normals, with the exact same texture applied, with the exact same sun direction on both surfaces. You also appear to have building shadows turned off. What do you expect FS to do in this case except display them exactly the same? And when you orient your view so one is directly on top of the other (i.e. perfectly perpendicular), the edges blend together. That's certainly no big surprise.

Some things you can do:

1. Texture the bump out using a texture with the surface lightened or darkened slightly.
2. Texture the edges of the bump out with a darker or lighter stripe.
3. Turn on building shadows.
4. Use a rendered texture like Rick displays so there are variations in color and darkness/shadow.

Hope this helps,

 

[kmanning]

Hi Ken:

Please attach- / link to- a ZIP of the above Sketchup 3D model in KMZ file format, so we can perform a proper analysis here.

Hi Gary, Here's the kmz file you requested. If you need the .skp file, let me know.

PS: Please tell us which numeric version of Sketchup was used to create the above 3D model.

The Sketchup version used for modeling the terminal was Sketchup 2017. The version number is 17.2.2555

Please also tell us whether the walls of the building in that 3D model were textured with one of Sketchup's default "Materials", and if so, which one.

I think the texture is the Sketchup's default Material and its name is "Steel Brushed Stainless."

Ken.

 

[arno]

Hi,

I checked the model and all normals are setup fine. So I think the issue is as Tom already indicated that you are looking for such a direction that the two polygons are parallel and given the same material they will look exactly the same. Can't be solved when only using a single color.

 

[Riddlez]

Oh, no argument there Arno and Sketchup provides ready tools to identify normal orientation and is just as willing to allow the user to ignore those orientations. However, reversals occur when one changes drawing direction, or extrudes, etc., meaning there are specific transitions that generate them, which we're not likely to see in this type of shape. As an example, if Ken had extruded his window plane inward, to create the impression of a sill, that sill could very likely be reversed in orientation to the polygons of the window and wall planes.
Another occasion that generates reversed polygons is when a plane is intersected or broken. Sketchup automatically triangulates a rectangular plane into two triangles with identical orientation. However, were you to section the plane, as an example, to cut windows into a hangar door, the automatically generated triangulations will not be in alignment as SU would have no way of knowing which orientation is the priority. In such a situation, the mixed normals will render thusly:

Bear in mind that the above picture was captured of a model rendered with a well proportioned and properly shaded photo style texture. Altogether, it's my suggestion that these types of scenarios are somewhat advanced beyond the task of identifying the different types of polyon mappings and applying the appropriate ones.

Let me clarify with this screenshot. This problem wasn't to do with normals that have reversed in the modeling process. That is very easy to detect in 3Ds Max when that occurs. The problem was only when normal/bump maps were applied.

I had the same problem 10 years ago when creating textures for buildings. I would use simple textures to create buildings and would get a similar result of corners blending together. The trick, as a few have mentioned above is to make sure the textures aren't the same. The use of shading or shadows that are burnt into the texture is your best bet. There are many techniques to do this. Some programmes like 3Ds Max have this feature already in the programme. I'm not sure what you can do with Sketch Up, I would create the shadows manually in Photoshop which is pretty easy to do. Though someone here might have an easier option.

 

[=rk=]

You needn't clarify anything, Riddlez. Your uploaded image exactly represents a condition discussed here. It does not matter how you caused it or got a solution, but thanks. Indeed thanks for your image contribution, however that is all it does; exactly represent the condition of mixed normals, I think I might have even suggested such on your thread.
We've already discovered the issue the OP expresses is caused by a more fundamental condition, the presence of any material mappings on polygons and how that renders and to be clear, the term is "baked" textures, it applies to 3d modelling software that has image editing capacity, where an ambient occlusion algorithm is applied to the render and the subsequent render is written to the texture file. Here is a coarse description of the process.

Generally it boils down to objects shadowing themselves, the consequence being small tight corners are dark and large flat open areas are light. Features tend to be outlined in a hazy darkness and I call it "the greasy handrail effect." Yes you can do it with Sketchup, there are many AO options available, nearly all of them payware and most of them render only a tableaux or still. However with a very small degree of ingenuity one can arrange a very complex model to render beautifully with AO projection, throw a touch of sun shadow in there for good measure, record a screen capture, rebuild that same model with much less polygon detail and then project the rendered screen capture onto your new Sketchup model.

 

[GaryGB]

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/problem-with-color-or-texture-blending.441296/#post-783664

How do I find out if "assume vertical normal is set?

Ken.

Hi Ken:

Here is your KPVD 3D model imported to MCX, with the Material Editor "Highlight Selected" checkbox 'checked'.

Note that the selected Face has a Sketchup "Texture" Material applied, and not a Sketchup "Color".

Note as well that, in MCX, "Assume Vertical Normal" is set to "False"; this correlates with non-display of a vector 'direction' arrow in Sketchup using the above cited "Draw Slope Normals" plugin Ruby script, when its option to "Draw Slope Vectors on Selected Faces" is enabled.

One may note, however, that MCX is still able to display a 'direction' for Normals via the 'Display Normals" task-bar icon.

BTW: While it is true that one can greatly enhance the appearance of any mapped textures used on a 3D model via a photo-realistic rendering application, one must bear in mind results may vary with orientation of the object relative to the sun position and location of the object on the 3D world globe, as well as time of Day and Date of Year, since many of the "better" rendering applications make an effort to gather global illumination attributes from many aspects of a scene.

IIUC, the part of the KPVD building your screenshots show might not be in the shadow of the building, which may impact how those faces are rendered due to a relatively higher 'brightness' within the scene.

Some rendering applications have many options to adjust the resulting render for better realism, even when Faces are "Shadowed" ...or directly illuminated by the 'Sun' in a scene.


However, if the sides of buildings at KPVD are generally rather low in surface details due to their construction material, one may still need to provide 'artificial' details to even the best on-site photographs intended for use as mapped textures, regardless of whether they are processed by a photo-realistic render / re-map.

KPVD in bright soft daylight:

Thus, one might further consider "manual" methods of enhancement such as used in Bill Womack's tutorial video above.

GaryGB

 

[kmanning]

The issue is the consequence of using polygon color. There is no shading, no gradation

Will you elaborate on what you mean by "using polygon colors." Do you mean I'm using the wrong colors, the wrong tools, or what?

and yes, colored polygons do look cartoonish, using RGB values there are only 16777216 possible colors to chose from.

Are you saying that using the RGB values is the wrong tool? I was using the RGBs to set a particular colors.

Simply compare the terminal model to the surface of the jetway, which has been textured, to see a stark example of the difference.

I've done that in other sceneries that looked realistic. I seems like this is going to mean much more time and work in making good textures. I didn't realize that there was more involved than to color or texture a model. So, does this mean that all developers that texture an airport scenery have to do all this work to make their textures look right? If that's the case, I need to learn how to do it. Isn't there a tutorial in Sketchup that explains in detail how to properly shade and bake textures?

Words like "Polygon Colors," "Assume Vertical Normals," "Display Normals," "Bumps," "Shading," "Baked," I have no idea what they mean nor how they relate or effect the scenery. I think I know what shading means but the others I do not. When I came across these words, I went into MCX and try to find them, or the icon button, to see what it does. Display Normals, I think it was, show those red arrows but I have no idea what they mean nor how they relates to my problem because I don't understand what those arrows mean, and I guess the direction of the arrows mean something.

You want to be working on something like this

Yes, I agree but I need to learn how. I know there're some sites that explain some of these things but it's based on using their product and I prefer a product I'm more familiar with.


Ken.

 

[kmanning]

Hi Gary,
In the Material Editor in MCX, there's a tab that says Optimize, showing the Property on the left with green on the left and red on the right. Some of them say False and some say True. Under Property are colors and textures and say Double Sided. What does all of this mean and how to I know which color to choose, and how do I know rather to select true or false, or "use left value or use right value?

Ken.