Modeling and texturing for optimal performance - Revision history

Mjahn: /* Basic modelling rules */

2010-03-11T09:31:05Z

Basic modelling rules

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:31, 11 March 2010
Line 40:		Line 40:
	== Basic modelling rules ==		== Basic modelling rules ==

	Before we take a look at how to model and texture your object as ~~efficient~~ as possible, with the texture vertices and drawcalls in mind, we will first take a look at some simple “rules” for the modelling of objects.		Before we take a look at how to model and texture your object as efficiently as possible, with the texture vertices and drawcalls in mind, we will first take a look at some simple “rules” for the modelling of objects.

	The first and most obvious rule is to use only what you need. If you are making a generic autogen it does ~~probably~~ not make ~~that~~ much sense to use ten different texture sheets and thousands of vertices on this object. That is more something you would do for an important landmark on your airport which the user will look at from close distance. So try to keep things as simple as possible and don't overdo it when that is not needed.		The first and most obvious rule is to use only what you need. If you are making a generic autogen it does not make much sense to use ten different texture sheets and thousands of vertices on this object. That is more something you would do for an important landmark on your airport which the user will look at from close distance. So try to keep things as simple as possible and don't overdo it when that is not needed.

	Related to this is another area where you would have to make a ~~choose~~, the textures versus polygons battle. You could model all the details of your object with polygons, but often using fewer polygons and putting the detail in the texture ~~you are using would make~~ more sense.		Related to this is another area where you would have to make a choice, the textures versus polygons battle. You could model all the details of your object with polygons, but often using fewer polygons and putting the detail in the texture makes more sense.

	A nice example of this is a GMax tutorial I once saw on how to model a house (not the MS tutorial that comes with FS2004, but one for another game). In that tutorial it was explained in detail how to model each of the tiles of roof in 3D. That might be a good approach if you are modelling for a first person shooter game, but for Flight Simulator using ~~a single polygon with~~ a nice roof texture is a lot more sensible.		A nice example of this is a GMax tutorial I once saw on how to model a house (not the MS tutorial that comes with FS2004, but one for another game). In that tutorial it was explained in detail how to model each of the tiles of the roof in 3D. That might be a good approach if you are modelling for a first person shooter game, but for Flight Simulator using one or two polygons for the whole roof and a nice roof texture is a lot more sensible.

	For the usage of textures the basic rule is to choose the right resolution for the object you are making and to use a similar resolution on all parts of your object. When you are making a generic autogen object you in general would use a lower resolution for the textures. On the other hand for that big airport terminal building where the user comes very close, it makes sense to use a higher resolution. And once you have selected your resolution, stick to that for the total object. Having one side with a much higher resolution than another side, will give a very weird looking ~~affect and makes your object look bad~~.		For the usage of textures the basic rule is to choose the right resolution for the object you are making and to use a similar resolution on all parts of your object. When you are making a generic autogen object you in general would use a lower resolution for the textures. On the other hand for that big airport terminal building where the user comes very close, it makes sense to use a higher resolution. And once you have selected your resolution, stick to that for the total object. Having one side with a much higher resolution than another side will give a very weird looking effect.

	But even if you follow these basic rules of modelling, you can still create an object that will not display optimal performance in FS. The rest of this article will focus on some tips and tricks to improve the performance even further, while they have no effect on the way your object looks, so no compromises on the amount of detail.		But even if you follow these basic rules of modelling, you can still create an object that will not display optimal performance in FS. The rest of this article will focus on some tips and tricks to improve the performance even further, while they have no effect on the way your object looks, so no compromises on the amount of detail.

Arno at 20:12, 6 July 2008

2008-07-06T20:12:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:12, 6 July 2008
Line 78:		Line 78:
	The LOD 'distance' in FS is in fact determined by the number of pixels covered by the object on screen. Therefore a small/simple object on a low resolution screen will switch to different LOD at a different ''geographical distance'' than a large/complex object on a higher resolution screen. There will be some experimentation needed to get these values set at acceptable levels.		The LOD 'distance' in FS is in fact determined by the number of pixels covered by the object on screen. Therefore a small/simple object on a low resolution screen will switch to different LOD at a different ''geographical distance'' than a large/complex object on a higher resolution screen. There will be some experimentation needed to get these values set at acceptable levels.

	[[Category:Scenery ~~design~~]]		[[Category:Scenery Design]]
	[[Category:Aircraft ~~design~~]]		[[Category:Aircraft Design]]
	[[Category:Modeling]]		[[Category:Modeling]]
	[[Category:Texturing]]		[[Category:Texturing]]

Arno: Modeling and Texturing - Optimising for performance moved to Modeling and texturing for optimal performance

2008-07-06T20:11:47Z

Modeling and Texturing - Optimising for performance moved to Modeling and texturing for optimal performance

← Older revision	Revision as of 15:11, 6 July 2008
(No difference)

Arno at 20:11, 6 July 2008

2008-07-06T20:11:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:11, 6 July 2008
Line 77:		Line 77:

	The LOD 'distance' in FS is in fact determined by the number of pixels covered by the object on screen. Therefore a small/simple object on a low resolution screen will switch to different LOD at a different ''geographical distance'' than a large/complex object on a higher resolution screen. There will be some experimentation needed to get these values set at acceptable levels.		The LOD 'distance' in FS is in fact determined by the number of pixels covered by the object on screen. Therefore a small/simple object on a low resolution screen will switch to different LOD at a different ''geographical distance'' than a large/complex object on a higher resolution screen. There will be some experimentation needed to get these values set at acceptable levels.

	~~== Related ==~~

	~~=== Internal ===~~
	~~{{Template:Navbox-Textur-Related}}~~

	~~=== External ===~~
	~~Placeholder text~~

	[[Category:Scenery design]]		[[Category:Scenery design]]
	[[Category:Aircraft design]]		[[Category:Aircraft design]]
			[[Category:Modeling]]
			[[Category:Texturing]]

BASys at 15:07, 18 May 2008

2008-05-18T15:07:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:07, 18 May 2008
Line 88:		Line 88:
	[[Category:Scenery design]]		[[Category:Scenery design]]
	[[Category:Aircraft design]]		[[Category:Aircraft design]]
	~~[[Category:FSX]]~~

Timmo: /* Levels of detail */

2008-05-02T04:19:53Z

Levels of detail

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:19, 1 May 2008
Line 74:		Line 74:
	Another way to improve the performance of your object is to add levels of detail (LODs) to it. A LOD is a simpler version of your object that are shown from a distance, where you can't see all the details anyway. But that does not mean that you need to add a ''lot'' of LOD levels to your object, because each additional level increases the memory usage. So you need to find a balance between the amount of memory used by the object and the reduction in texture vertices that you can achieve by adding the LODs. For most objects using 3 LODs is probably the best compromise. Then you would create a LOD 100, a LOD 040 and a LOD 010. You could make LOD 010 a dummy, so that the object is not drawn from a great distance.		Another way to improve the performance of your object is to add levels of detail (LODs) to it. A LOD is a simpler version of your object that are shown from a distance, where you can't see all the details anyway. But that does not mean that you need to add a ''lot'' of LOD levels to your object, because each additional level increases the memory usage. So you need to find a balance between the amount of memory used by the object and the reduction in texture vertices that you can achieve by adding the LODs. For most objects using 3 LODs is probably the best compromise. Then you would create a LOD 100, a LOD 040 and a LOD 010. You could make LOD 010 a dummy, so that the object is not drawn from a great distance.

	*Note that the way FS determines 'distance' here isnt as simple as a geographical distance from the object (I.e. LOD_100 activates at 100m, LOD_040 activates at 40m etc) In fact, thinking about it this way will cause confusion since the values are actually inverse to the distance (I.e. use a high LOD value for objects that will show when you are closer to them).		<nowiki>*</nowiki>Note that the way FS determines 'distance' here isnt as simple as a geographical distance from the object (I.e. LOD_100 activates at 100m, LOD_040 activates at 40m etc) In fact, thinking about it this way will cause confusion since the values are actually inverse to the distance (I.e. use a high LOD value for objects that will show when you are closer to them).

	The LOD 'distance' in FS is in fact determined by the number of pixels covered by the object on screen. Therefore a small/simple object on a low resolution screen will switch to different LOD at a different ''geographical distance'' than a large/complex object on a higher resolution screen. There will be some experimentation needed to get these values set at acceptable levels.		The LOD 'distance' in FS is in fact determined by the number of pixels covered by the object on screen. Therefore a small/simple object on a low resolution screen will switch to different LOD at a different ''geographical distance'' than a large/complex object on a higher resolution screen. There will be some experimentation needed to get these values set at acceptable levels.

Timmo: /* Levels of detail */

2008-05-02T04:18:14Z

Levels of detail

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:18, 1 May 2008
Line 72:		Line 72:
	== Levels of detail ==		== Levels of detail ==

	Another way to improve the performance of your object is to add levels of detail (LODs) to it. A LOD is a simpler version of your object that are shown from a distance, where you can't see all the details anyway. But that does not mean that you need to add a lot of LOD levels to your object, because each additional level increases the memory usage. So you need to find a balance between the amount of memory used by the object and the reduction in texture vertices that you can achieve by adding the LODs. For most objects using 3 LODs is probably the best compromise. Then you would create a LOD 100, a LOD 040 and a LOD 010. You could make LOD 010 a dummy, so that the object is not drawn from a great distance.		Another way to improve the performance of your object is to add levels of detail (LODs) to it. A LOD is a simpler version of your object that are shown from a distance, where you can't see all the details anyway. But that does not mean that you need to add a ''lot'' of LOD levels to your object, because each additional level increases the memory usage. So you need to find a balance between the amount of memory used by the object and the reduction in texture vertices that you can achieve by adding the LODs. For most objects using 3 LODs is probably the best compromise. Then you would create a LOD 100, a LOD 040 and a LOD 010. You could make LOD 010 a dummy, so that the object is not drawn from a great distance.

			*Note that the way FS determines 'distance' here isnt as simple as a geographical distance from the object (I.e. LOD_100 activates at 100m, LOD_040 activates at 40m etc) In fact, thinking about it this way will cause confusion since the values are actually inverse to the distance (I.e. use a high LOD value for objects that will show when you are closer to them).

			The LOD 'distance' in FS is in fact determined by the number of pixels covered by the object on screen. Therefore a small/simple object on a low resolution screen will switch to different LOD at a different ''geographical distance'' than a large/complex object on a higher resolution screen. There will be some experimentation needed to get these values set at acceptable levels.

	== Related ==		== Related ==

Timmo: slight sentance structure and cohesion edit

2008-05-02T04:04:17Z

slight sentance structure and cohesion edit

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:04, 1 May 2008
Line 8:		Line 8:
	\| FS98 = unknown		\| FS98 = unknown
	}}		}}
	When developing an object, the designer is always seeking a compromise between the amount of detail to put into the object and the performance achieved when using it in Flight Simulator. On one hand we would like to put in a lot of detail, either as polygons or as high resolution textures, because that will give the most realistic result. On the hand we also want ~~that~~ the objects we create ~~performance reasonable~~ well when we load them in FS, ~~because else~~ the users of our object~~, being an~~ aircraft or scenery, will not ~~be pleased~~. So the developer has to find a compromise here.		When developing an object, the designer is always seeking a compromise between the amount of detail to put into the object and the performance achieved when using it in Flight Simulator. On one hand we would like to put in a lot of detail, either as polygons or as high resolution textures, because that will give the most realistic result. On the other hand we also want the objects we create to perform reasonably well when we load them in FS, otherwise the users of our object (either aircraft or scenery) will not have an enjoyable experience. So the developer has to find a compromise here.

	On his blog Adrian Woods has an interesting series of posts about how to optimize the performance of the art you are making. I would like to encourage everybody to have a look at those posts ([http://blogs.technet.com/torgo3000/archive/2007/06/01/performance-art.aspx part 1], [http://blogs.technet.com/torgo3000/archive/2007/06/14/performance-art-2-when-is-a-draw-call-not-a-draw-call.aspx part 2], [http://blogs.technet.com/torgo3000/archive/2007/06/19/performance-art-3-polygons-don-t-matter.aspx part 3] and [http://blogs.technet.com/torgo3000/archive/2007/09/17/performance-art-4-always-use-a-texture-and-bones-ain-t-free.aspx part 4]). But because these posts might be a bit technical, this article aims to provide some more background information and examples to express his suggestions more clearly.		On his blog Adrian Woods has an interesting series of posts about how to optimize the performance of the art you are making. I would like to encourage everybody to have a look at those posts ([http://blogs.technet.com/torgo3000/archive/2007/06/01/performance-art.aspx part 1], [http://blogs.technet.com/torgo3000/archive/2007/06/14/performance-art-2-when-is-a-draw-call-not-a-draw-call.aspx part 2], [http://blogs.technet.com/torgo3000/archive/2007/06/19/performance-art-3-polygons-don-t-matter.aspx part 3] and [http://blogs.technet.com/torgo3000/archive/2007/09/17/performance-art-4-always-use-a-texture-and-bones-ain-t-free.aspx part 4]). But because these posts might be a bit technical, this article aims to provide some more background information and examples to express his suggestions more clearly.

BASys at 20:21, 18 April 2008

2008-04-18T20:21:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:21, 18 April 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Infobox-Applicable-FSVersion
			\| FSXI = false
			\| FSXA = true
			\| FSX = true
			\| FS2004 = false
			\| FS2002 = false
			\| FS2000 = unknown
			\| FS98 = unknown
			}}
	When developing an object, the designer is always seeking a compromise between the amount of detail to put into the object and the performance achieved when using it in Flight Simulator. On one hand we would like to put in a lot of detail, either as polygons or as high resolution textures, because that will give the most realistic result. On the hand we also want that the objects we create performance reasonable well when we load them in FS, because else the users of our object, being an aircraft or scenery, will not be pleased. So the developer has to find a compromise here.		When developing an object, the designer is always seeking a compromise between the amount of detail to put into the object and the performance achieved when using it in Flight Simulator. On one hand we would like to put in a lot of detail, either as polygons or as high resolution textures, because that will give the most realistic result. On the hand we also want that the objects we create performance reasonable well when we load them in FS, because else the users of our object, being an aircraft or scenery, will not be pleased. So the developer has to find a compromise here.

BASys: /* Internal */

2008-03-30T10:19:43Z

Internal

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:19, 30 March 2008
Line 68:		Line 68:

	=== Internal ===		=== Internal ===
	{{Template:Navbox-~~Textures~~-Related}}		{{Template:Navbox-Textur-Related}}

	=== External ===		=== External ===