I heard this is true that you can take terrain info from google earth (I think?) and import it into a program which you can make a custom track out of? I would like to make my local twisty road track.
I use real height data from Google earth when making motocross tracks, but the method I use only allows me to extract the heightmap data..
See https://youtu.be/m91V9rCSrLo
For larger areas you can zoom in when grabbing geolocation area and run it multiple times to build up a larger image.
But, once I have the heightmap in L3DT I can then export it as a mesh (3ds or obj) and import that into Blender. You could do this for the surrounding terrain, then re-create the road as it's own surface to use for riding on.
This stuff isn't easy though, I mean it is easy enough, but it's a lot of work to make something to be proud of ;)
You can take terrain from google earth but you have to be using the correct software to do it, and it's not always accurate data either as far as the height data is concerned. Google data is offset by 2 secs to discourage people stealing their data.
"TheFatController" has already given you some good advice above, but I find the best software for grabbing google earth data is probably Google "Sketchup/Pro", but there is plenty of software out there, some free. Just use google or look up tutorials on YouTube which often point you to software to use that will also do the job.
You could even use "Race Track Builder(RTB)" for grabbing google earth terrain data but RTB or BTB alone doesn't do a very good job of creating track surfaces good enough for GPB in my opinion.
Hawk.
There's also LiDAR data you can find/use. If you're lucky enough to find also CAD that would be great.
http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/22897-Emery-s-Public-LiDAR-Database?highlight=
Quote from: GTP on October 14, 2016, 11:39:08 PM
There's also LiDAR data you can find/use. If you're lucky enough to find also CAD that would be great.
http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/22897-Emery-s-Public-LiDAR-Database?highlight=
Very nice! Great link GTP... Should come in very handy! ;D
Thanks mate! ;) 8)
Hawk.
Another option is to work straight from the DEMs.
I think Google Earth is based on STRM3.
http://dds.cr.usgs.gov/srtm/version2_1/SRTM3/
If it's not the same data, it's very similar.
(https://s2.postimg.org/mzlzbgr49/Estoril_01.jpg)
There may better data out there depending on where the road is. STRM3 coverage is global though so it's the handy one.
I don't think it's the same data source Groovski..... The other link is saying it's down to 50cm resolution for the Lidar data. Google Earth is something like 5 - 10 meter resolution at best probably more in some cases if I remember rightly? :-\
Hawk.
I meant STRM3 and Google Earth are the same(or similar). The first pic is GE, the second is the STRM for Estoril.
STRM3 is 90m, GE about the same. The OS data I used for OM and Knockhill was 50m.
The first try at a landscape for OM was from GE. I used Autocad Map 2009 which had a utility for scooping both the mesh and aerial overlay out of GE. It was like magic, you just zoomed in GE to the extent you wanted, went to Map, punched an icon and tadaaa! :D
Autodesk and Google had a falling out though and they pulled the function.
Thon Open Data LIDAR resource looks like a belter. That's a new one on me too. ;D
Scarborough data downloaded, now to get it into Lightwave and have a look see. :P
Mmmmmm - DEM porn! :P
(https://s2.postimg.org/9deov9vft/OM_166.jpg)
Cheers for the link GTP. ;)
Wow! Impressive Groveski! ;D
Looks like a lot of cleaning up work though, but the detail is definitely there by the look of it mate! ;D
I presume most of those spikes in the data are simply trees or bushes, or even buildings? Impressive!
Hawk.
You misunderstand mate..... I know you didn't create it, but you posted the pic.... It was the view in the pic I was saying "Wow!" about and how impressive it looked. Lol ;D 8)
But no doubt to use that data you will need to put in a lot of cleaning up work, but it would be worth it I believe. ;D
Hawk.
Thon LIDAR data is cool-as so I've picked a pet project and thought I'd take some grabs and talk through setting up the data for a build.
[I should mention straight off that there's stuff in here that you don't need to do. I like lots of overlays but some of them never really get used. This is the long winded version - you can decide for yourself how much can be skipped] ;)
First wave of data is:
Aerial LIDAR - from http://environment.data.gov.uk/ds/survey/index.jsp#/survey
(using the 2m data to start with. There's 1m coverage of about half the circuit which I'll introduce later but there's 90-odd percent coverage with the 2m so I'm using that to locate the model initialy)
(https://s2.postimg.org/ys5cz19w9/Lakes_01.jpg)
DEM - from https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendatadownload/products.html
(using Land-Form PANORAMA ASCII grid [DTM])
(https://s2.postimg.org/qk5wijbvd/Lakes_02.jpg)
1:250,000 Scale Colour Raster - also available from https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/opendatadownload/products.html but I pinched it from Memory map instead.
(https://s1.postimg.org/fwp4t9br3/Lakes_03.jpg)
1:25,000 Scale Colour Raster - Memory Map
(the real image is 3000-odd pixels square)
(https://s1.postimg.org/z8xzj1ajz/Lakes_04.jpg)
I deliberately made the model square - and the maps - just to simplify things. The Land-Form tiles and 250k map are 40x40km. The 25k coverage is 8x8km.
The Memory Map tiles were pinched by zooming in to a decent resolution, taking a screengrab, pasting into photoshop, moving along to the next bit of map and repeating until I had the whole area as a bunch of layers. Then I cropped away the window border, upped the canvas size and moved each layer into place to form one big image. They took 9 grabs each (3x3) and this process can be used with most mapping programs or online map sources....
....but not Google Earth - it's a pain and acts a bit like a wide angle lens, the grabs don't match up when you piece them together(Google Maps is fine) - more on this later when the maps are getting replaced by aerial photos.
The LIDAR and DEM data were both processed exactly the same way - as described the other day in the OM thread:
Quote
Autodesk Infraworks
Procedure:
Start IW > New Model > Give it a name.
Select all the tiles you want to convert for the job in Windows Explorer (Do them all in one go and IW will join them together)
Drag and drop them into the Data Sources list.
A configuration window will open - Rummage through the Coordinate System list(the little icon at the side of the dropdown) and choose BritishNatGrid then hit OK.
The new source should be listed as 'Configured' and when it's selected the little refresh button above the list should be green(it'll be greyed off if IW isn't happy with the data/co-ord system combo).
Punch the refresh button.
The display window will change and draw out the model.
Once it's done, hit the Settings and Utilities icon then Export FBX.
Use the Define Interactively function in the Export dialogue to trim down the model if you like(double click for the final point on the loop).
At first I was getting an export error with the lidar model - it didn't work until I trimmed the model so I think there may be a limit.
Don't know what it is but the working attempt came out at just under 700k polys(the not-working attempt was maybe three times the size).
This LIDAR model came out at 1.7m polys so either it just squeezed under the limit or the error I got before had nothing to do with poly count.
I did have a problem first attempt this time as well - was trying to browse the net while it exported and everything crashed(machine lockup). When I set it up again, set it off exporting and left it to it it worked fine.
So, converted the exported Land-Form model from FBX to LWO using Deep Exploration(or SAP Visual Enterprise Author as it's called these days) and loaded it into Lightwave.
Rotated it by a bawhair(that's Infraworks being a smartarse and spinning things from grid to true north - can probably be switched off but I haven't spotted the tickbox yet(oh - maybe there's a preferences setting for magnetic declination that can be set to zero)) and moved it into position with the bottom lefthand corner at 0,0.
(https://s1.postimg.org/8w5p7zx4v/Lakes_05.jpg)
Applied the 1:250k map as an auto-size planer UV.
(https://s2.postimg.org/72n2rsl9l/Lakes_06.jpg)
Quick zoom in to check it was lining up ok. Trig points pretty much in the right places and contours following the hillsides. The maps won't be on the final model but the closer the better nonetheless(later on I'll be changing these skins to aerial photos which I'll crop to the same extents as the maps).
(https://s1.postimg.org/4qusm2zcv/Lakes_07.jpg)
Changed everything to a new surface and applied the 1:25k map, also as an auto-size planer UV.
At first it covered the whole model so nothing was lining up. It takes a little number crunching and UV tweaking:
First I scaled the UV:
Main tile(250k) is 40000m
Inner tile(25k) is 8000m
Division of main by inner = 5
Divide 1 by that = 0.2
So it's 0.2 of the size, meaning the polys in the UV selection have to be scaled by 500% to make the texture map shrink to the right size.
(Yes - the last two steps can be skipped, you simply add 00 to the end of the division number. Just thought I'd talk through the full process because in some modeling programs you may be scaling the size of the image against the model instead of the other way round - in which case you'd use 0.2 as a scaling factor)
....then moved it into place:
Difference between insertion points is 16000,18000. (x,y in m)
Inner tile size is 8000
Divide the vector by the size = 2,2.25
So the UV texture map offset is -200% and -225%. (-ve movement of the model to move the UV map in a +ve direction)
(https://s2.postimg.org/bw0ic5smh/Lakes_08.jpg)
Next thing to do is select the polys that fall within the inner tile...
(https://s2.postimg.org/qu29ug67t/Lakes_09.jpg)
...hit invert selection...
(https://s1.postimg.org/pe9qjo9fj/Lakes_10.jpg)
...and flick the outer part of the model back to the 250k surface...
(https://s1.postimg.org/44067ax33/Lakes_11.jpg)
....and that's the first construction layer done.
Switched to another layer and loaded in the lidar model.
(https://s2.postimg.org/3kke9ucll/Lakes_12.jpg)
One minus the other to move it into place(the cursor isn't visible on the screengrabs but it's pointed at the same feature on each model).
(https://s1.postimg.org/cjub35wun/Lakes_13.jpg)
Checked how it looks at the other end(lining up nicely).
(https://s2.postimg.org/yn3rfmlih/Lakes_14.jpg)
Yeah, looking the part. :D
(https://s1.postimg.org/74t4acpfj/Lakes_15.jpg)
(http://www.holidaycottagescumbria.com/wp-content/uploads/Castlerigg-Stone-Circle-1.jpg)
To be continued.....
This is fasinating me. Great work
I am so glad I live in a place called London as I would hate saying I live in Cockermouth...............who the hell came up with that town name???
I am working with the Texas Police Dept on rider awareness and they need software with city and country roads, could this be done in GPB for a real USA city too? I cant see why not. Only thing is they need traffic too.
Google maps also has 3D I believe with buildings is that usable for GPB?
DD
Quote from: doubledragoncc on October 27, 2016, 07:53:56 AM
I am working with the Texas Police Dept on rider awareness and they need software with city and country roads, could this be done in GPB for a real USA city too? I cant see why not. Only thing is they need traffic too.
Put those Texas roads in game and as soon as online works properly, then put up a server and we can do some road carnage for better awareness :P
LOL Stout. The problem is the systems are mobile and taken to events and need software that is not dependent on internet, so offline is important.
Shame Piboso has no AI for this or mix cars and bikes on same track!!!
DD
Quote from: doubledragoncc on October 27, 2016, 08:14:10 AM
LOL Stout. The problem is the systems are mobile and taken to events and need software that is not dependent on internet, so offline is important.
Shame Piboso has no AI for this or mix cars and bikes on same track!!!
But I think then also it would not help much with "awareness". From what I understand the Texas police want to enhance awareness for motorcycle riders and car drivers, right? You could not really simulate that with AI (at least not with AI by current standards). You'd need to have a super-realistic AI, which would be diverse, differing levels of attention, depending on lighting, environment etc. etc...
It would not help much for awareness imo, if AI would have perfect decision making. Then the only thing you'd see are the things the user might do obviously wrong (e.g. disregarding a red light). But during a test situation the user would probably very attentive. In real life, most accidents happen when both sides mis-judge a certain situation. Awareness should help detect other people's behaviour and possibly prevent an accident to happen even though one rider/driver does something wrong.
It might help for the awareness of car drivers though, if motorcycle riders would be simulated (but then also only if realistic behaviour was simulated like jumpy lane changes, sudden accelerations etc etc).
The basic thing for me whenever I ride a bicycle or motorcycle is, I always try to ride expecting not to be seen, because of the small silhouette etc two-wheeled vehicles are prone to be overlooked. I was almost killed 2 weeks ago by a ca. 60 year old woman that was just not seeing me on my bike (it was dawn and it was rainy). It is hard to simulate such things and as far as I know, such AI has not been developed (it would be interesting for driving schools or police though).
Edit: Sorry for the OT
Me too sorry
But that is the problem. CityCar Driving want $10,000 to make a bike for it!!!! So that is a bit much but the guy, Otto that has got a grant and ordered from me needs something so it is real hard.
GTA5 is okay for this but no physics and inputs are limited, no shift or clutch!!! TDU is buggered as Atari fucked us all over and The Crew is online only so need GPB and WRS with AI and a city map lol.
Was OT but I would love a map for GPB that had city, country and village roads for point to point and other racing. Pub to Pub lol
DD
Making the same thing for any area in the states wouldn't be a problem - data-wise. USGS has full coverage of STRM1 - 1 arc-second resolution(30m):
http://dds.cr.usgs.gov/srtm/version2_1/SRTM1/
....and all the other goodies you may need - Topo maps, aerial photos, ect....
http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/
In among those there are 1m and 1/9th arc-second sets as well as Lidar point clouds, all with patchy coverage just like over here. The 1/9th set has something like 25% coverage so is probably the best bet.
You'd likely get lucky with Texas data. Oil rich areas tend to be pretty well mapped.
Info about all the datasets:
https://www.usgs.gov/products/data-and-tools/gis-data
Procedure is just the same, except that in Infraworks you'd use UTM84-30 as a co-cordinate system instead if BritishNatGrid.
Yeah, you can lift models from Google Earth.
http://www.sketchup.com/
http://www.deep-shadows.com/hax/3DRipperDX.htm
As for towns/cities - you can build anything...
....given the time. :P
It's no coincidence that the route I've chosen only passes about 3 buildings. ;)
...and talk about lucky finds - That's one of the TSO's sorted. :)
http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/btrar_ahrb_2005/castlerigg.cfm
Thanks for all the info G
DD
Aerial Overlay.
Need one for Knockhill so here's how it goes:
Pick a source. In the UK Bing maps is your best bet - it's higher-res and allows you to zoom in closer than the others.
NOTE: Check a building or two in the area to make sure the view is top-down. Some aerials have been taken at an angle and stretched to fit - if it's a hilly track that will affect the layout a touch.
Take a series of screengrabs that overlap. With this image only being for a construction layer I'm not bothered about Bings buttons - If it was for an in-game skin I'd have taken more grabs to allow me to crop out the button areas.
Pile them up as layers in an image editor as you're taking them.
(https://s1.postimg.org/so60vr8kv/Knockhill_09.jpg)
Crop the border off.
(https://s1.postimg.org/u3hmrvp2n/Knockhill_10.jpg)
Increase the canvas size so it'll be big enough for the full image.
(https://s2.postimg.org/47asv52zd/Knockhill_11.jpg)
Roughly lay out the images.
(https://s1.postimg.org/vjxqnrhdb/Knockhill_12.jpg)
Zoom in to the edge between the first two images, pick a prominent feature, drag the second image alongside the first then slip it sideways into place.
(https://s2.postimg.org/cg7lt2cyh/Knockhill_13.jpg)
I tend to merge the layers as I'm going. Think I've done one too many accidental movements of the wrong layer in the past, if I merge them then what's done is done and can't be selected by mistake.
(https://s1.postimg.org/jc1q2sfyn/Knockhill_14.jpg)
Once you're finished crop the final image, save it and take a note of it's resolution.
(https://s2.postimg.org/4vf4b6t55/Knockhill_15.jpg)
In your modeler create a poly with the same proportions as the image.
(https://s1.postimg.org/r37sudosf/Knockhill_16.jpg)
Apply the image as an auto-size planer UV.
(I'll be calling this the overlay from now on)
(https://s1.postimg.org/wpte9wr7z/Knockhill_17.jpg)
Working in plan view, move the overlay so it matches up with a prominent point on the model or map-skinned layer and select that point as a rotation centre.
(https://s1.postimg.org/z38avy1hb/Knockhill_18.jpg)
Rotate the overlay so it lines up with another prominent point on the model or map.
(https://s2.postimg.org/82k6ez8cp/Knockhill_19.jpg)
Change to Size mode - or Scale or whatever it's called in your modeler - something that'll retain the proportions(not Stretch!).
...and select a point that's lined up nicely at one end of the model.
(https://s1.postimg.org/jh2lnchzj/Knockhill_20.jpg)
Scale the overlay until it matches the model or map.
(https://s2.postimg.org/85cicvu2h/Knockhill_21.jpg)
And there you go - an overlay detailed enough to measure road widths from to within a few inches.
...or lay out the plan view of a spline for a scratch-build.
....or - as is the case here - edit the layout and widths of a model with issues.
(https://s2.postimg.org/j4c51g5d5/Knockhill_22.jpg)
P.S. Meanwhile at Castlerigg.... :)
(https://s2.postimg.org/eztaf7wd5/Lakes_16.jpg)
(https://s2.postimg.org/v2yrdnke1/Lakes_17.jpg)
(https://s2.postimg.org/lwz7huy4p/Lakes_18.jpg)
Well, it is real-world data after all - it's not that far off topic. ;D
Wow, I had no idea how many models there were in Google Maps these days.
I've come across a few pit buildings and stands but not many and nothing to write home about really. Was just checking out a hotel my folks are staying at next week and absent-mindedly punched the 3D button.
Half the city's modeled...
(https://s2.postimg.org/f4aslakuh/Valencia.jpg)
...so sorry if I was a little flippant earlier DD. With that amount of background geometry available a town model could flesh out pretty quickly. ;)
Horizon ring.
Don't need one for anything I'm working on a so a quick look back at how the one for Knockhill was made.
....using Google Earth.
Centre over the track then lift up high enough to clear the closer stuff that you don't want in the ring. In this case I'm up over Knock Hill itself(or 'Mount Knock' as it is in the old TOCA model we're running just now :) ).
(https://s2.postimg.org/j5e0s9k2x/Knockhill_23.jpg)
Take a series of grabs all the way round with a little overlap between them.
Crop each of the images and lay them out. This'll be an in-game skin so make the canvas size a power of 2(2048x1024 in this case). There may be extra space but you can fill that up with last-minute clutter skins later.
(https://s1.postimg.org/92wzu7m67/Knockhill_24.jpg)
About 6½ strips so make a cylinder a multiple of that in detail(I chose x8 - 52 segments) and whatever height you think it should be(I went for 1km at first then tweaked it down to 750m at the UV stage when I saw how the UV selection was matching the image).
Delete the cylinder caps, flip the normal direction of the ring's polys(so you're working on the inside rather than the outside), drop the ring onto a new surface, select everything and make a new UV(this time Cylindrical instead of Planar).
(https://s1.postimg.org/suq07c827/Knockhill_25.jpg)
Select - in this case - 8 polys(doesn't matter where you start, you can rotate it all when you're done) and start juggling the poly selections in the UV window(you'll get the idea pretty quick).
...and yeah - should have been 51 segments. Would have probably got away with it but now that the error's been posted for all to see I guess I'll need to fix it. :P
(https://s2.postimg.org/dwkrun5e1/Knockhill_26.jpg)
Rotate and scale the ring to suit the landscape.
(https://s1.postimg.org/cyp5be2cf/Knockhill_05.jpg)
(https://s2.postimg.org/dpk951ajd/Knockhill_04.jpg)
Can't believe I haven't mentioned Meshlab yet. It's like the Gimp or Blender for working with point clouds and should really have been pointed out much earlier. :-[
http://meshlab.sourceforge.net/
About aerial overlays...
Every bike modder that's read this thread probably wondered "Why not put the overlay in as a background/backdrop? That's the way it's supposed to be done.".
...and you'd all be right. ;) For a scratch build that's exactly where it should be and I should have said so before...
...but I've got used to dropping them in as models because it's:
...easier. Setting up a backdrop is dependant on the backdrop settings(which may or may not include rotation in your modeler). You don't want to be rotating the image in an image editor because it'll never be as crisp as the original(unless you whack up the resolution first then bring it back down after the rotation).
...smaller. Aerial overlays for tracks tend to be pretty high-res so introducing them a section at a time sometimes isn't a bad idea.
...quicker. Sometime's all you're after is an overlay for one section of track for one brief reason or another and aligning a backdrop takes longer than knocking up an overlay(for me anyway).
For example - here are the current overlays for Oliver's Mount, all of them were only dropped in to work on one little bit of track.
(https://s1.postimg.org/fjk78w0db/OM_176.jpg)
Using overlays instead of backgrounds - you have to work a little differently. One method I use a lot is to split the screen 50/50 between two plan views.
Make the viewports exactly the same width - If it's a few percent off it's incredibly hard to judge selections but if it's bang-on 50/50 it's effortlessly easy. ;)
So the overlay is above the model - I'm selecting points on the wireframe view then moving them into place on the textured view.
(https://s1.postimg.org/nx0k3x8r3/Knockhill_27.jpg)
Play with transparency too.
(https://s2.postimg.org/g6gslt0op/Knockhill_28.jpg)
Grooveski, if u need a huge images from Google/Bing/another, u may use SASplanet. I can record walkthrough process if needed.
Very nice work...... Thanks for imparting your experience and knowledge like this Grooveski, very useful! ;) 8)
Hawk.
My pleasure. ;)
..seriously, I'm doing pretty well out of this thread too. First aerial LIDAR data and now a specialist map-grabber. Happy days! ;D
Nice one Reactive. Looks like a fantastic little program.
http://www.sasgis.org/download/
Feel free to show us all how to use it. I was merrily geting used to it there and when I got to the grabbing stage I took one look at all the the options, thought " ??? - OK, hold off on this bit until there's a beer open!" and backed out again. :P
I doubt I'll ever make anything specifically for gpb, but as a track creator for mxb and having made replicas I'm really impressed at the detail that's gone into this tutorial! Well done mate. And I'm sure there are a few useful things I can take away from it given time to experiment. Thanks!
Groovski
https://www.youtube.com/v/LJXl4I7kjEc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJXl4I7kjEc
What a complete useful and detailed tutorial.
Thank you very much
Brilliant - Thanks again. :D
That's going to be a real time-saver. 8)
Great tutorial Reactive! This is a really useful piece of kit.... Thank you mate! ;D
Hawk.
A quick question for all the modellers out there. Could be another time saver.
I still do edge welding manually after smoothing(subdividing) a track surface.
...meaning I create a point along the kerb and grass vertices to match each point on the road model.
....then move all the kerb/grass points away from the road(creating a gap). I do it in sections, a straight will all be done in one but a corner will take a few selections.
.....then point by point I snap the kerb/grass back to the road.
It's a long-winded affair that I do because if I just used the the Merge Points function in Lightwave there's no way to lock the road layer and guarantee that it was the points on the kerbs/grass that were moving.
So that's the question. Anybody's modeler allow them to lock a layer then have the points on another layer snap to ones on the locked layer?
I've been LW for so long that it's all I know - but am happy to switch to another modeler to use a single function.
In Maya a locked layer won't even let you select the object so not possible to merge anything...
That is something I would like to know too, as the current process is certainly a long winded affair and can take literally hours of work to achieve.
But personally I find the best way is to extrude the track side grass areas directly from the track surface for the whole track first and then match and snap the terrain to the new grass verge area you just created. That way you guarantee no gaps between the track surface and the terrain and it's a lots simpler and easier and quicker to snap to less points in the terrain(reduced ploy's) than what can be a high detail or ploy section of track surface. Adjustments to any terrain can then be easily made, if required, knowing your not going to move the track surface poly's.
But yeah, a function like you describe would be very handy indeed. I'll let you know if I ever find a way of doing that. ;)
Hawk.
As for 3dMax there are scripts AntStitcher, AntStitcherFree and miauu's Vert Stitcher from miauu's Script Pack. Not working in 2017 version, but in 2014 and lower they might work well.
But also you can smooth selected poligons inside one model
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/28908695/GPBikes/smooth_inside_object_.JPG)
Not only had I not thought to look for plugins, but it turned out I didn't even know how the standard tool in LW works. ::)
Cheers again Reactive. Those plugins looked ideal so I rummaged around and found a couple of similar ones for LW. Smartweld and MultiMerge.
As I was installing them though I got to wondering if Merge Points had any rules that I wasn't aware of, so had a little play around and it looks like it always retains the highest of any pair of points.
...so instead of moving out points to make a gap that's workable in the plan view - I should have been moving them down. As long as the road points are all higher than the others they are left alone. ;D
(https://s1.postimg.org/6o7wnx1of/Knockhill_31.jpg)
Thanks for the glimpse of the MeshSmooth modifier - looks the part for sure. I'll give that a try on the next job. ;)
OK, last theory was wrong. Was just messing with some kerbs and when I tried a merge the high points moved down. ???
I'm onto thinking now that it's using the individual point numbers of the model. I done a quick cut/paste of the grass model...
...so the grass would have higher point numbers than the kerb(the point numbering system looks like it's fluid so a cut/paste moves that parts point numbers up and all the rest of the models point numbers move down to fill any gaps)
(https://s2.postimg.org/k4c8othyh/Knockhill_33.jpg)
Anyway, that time it worked.
...and it'd have worked with the previous attempt where the last thing I'd cut/pasted was the kerbs. It's retaining the position of the lower numbered of each point pair and moving the higher numbered one.
...I think. ::)
(https://s2.postimg.org/6w2toxn5l/Knockhill_32.jpg)
There's a system there somewhere I reckon, I just have to find it. :P
...and I don't really care what it is.
This way would be better if it's right, I could do away with the moving the points step - just add all the new points, do a few cut/pastes and be confident that it'll merge with prioroty road>kerbs>grass>sand>landscape
Lol - we'll see - fingers crossed. :D
It worked! :)
One-click welding with control over what what points remain static - love it. ;D
(https://s1.postimg.org/ee11y0hm7/Knockhill_37.jpg)
Used copy/paste to leave behind the original model(to check against).
(https://s1.postimg.org/dfuq34jov/Knockhill_38.jpg)
Should have figured this out years ago. ::)
There is something new to learn everyday m8 :)
Good job !
Great! ;D
What software are you using there Grooveski?
I've found that in the latest version of Maya, you can snap groups of verts to a surface made live; in previous versions you could do the same but all verts in the group wouldn't line up properly so you were better to do them individually.
Still got to do some more tests to see if I could select a whole group of verts around a whole track to see if I can get them to line up okay though. But even so, it does speed the process up considerably. ;)
Hawk.
Quote from: Hawk on December 09, 2016, 03:31:08 AM
What software are you using there Grooveski?
Lightwave. ;)
.....Modeler 99% of the time then going into LW Layout at the last minute to position cameras(and marshals).
(https://s2.postimg.org/wsqgeh79l/OM_177.jpg)
Not sure if you know, but you should create and place the GPB replay cameras and marshals using TrackED. Or are you talking about just placing some cameras for personal view/screenshot testing purposes in LW? :)
Hawk.
Makes no difference where they're positioned. ;) Lightwave is much nicer to work in than TrackEd, I've been using it for years and when I first tried TrackEd the marshal positioning wasn't working properly.
...so I do it this way. :)
Quote from: Grooveski on December 10, 2016, 12:47:18 AM
Makes no difference where they're positioned. ;) Lightwave is much nicer to work in than TrackEd, I've been using it for years and when I first tried TrackEd the marshal positioning wasn't working properly.
...so I do it this way. :)
I find TrackED is working fine for the positioning of the camera and marshal/track object positions, though you do have to first set-up the address for the GPB "misc" folder in the TrackED.ini file before you start so that you have access to the marshall and track project models. :)
So how are you exporting your scene camera/marshal positions to the .TSC and .CFG files needed in your track folder direct from your scene export? Or are you just using your scene camera positions as a position/orientation reference to manually create those files yourself? :)
Hawk.
Yeah, I copy the coordinates over from LW into the text files.
...which have had a single unpopulated block of text(one camera or marshal's worth) copy/pasted however many times then renumbered.
Then I open the files in TrackED to check them and add the camera limits/mashall directions.
....but on the other screen is still lightwave. It's there that I decide where the limits are going to be, in TrackED all I'm doing is changing the number until the little blue dot is in place.
I've absolutely nothing against TrackED by the way, I think it's a fantastic bit of kit. :)
...but it's orientation and viewport setups are pretty clunky compared to a pukka animation package.
Not being able to position the cameras using a Camera View is what I instantly missed - going in and out of test mode just isn't the same.
...and coming out of test mode is where I keep accidentaly hitting Esc >:( so the less I have to do it the better. :)
Could be said that manually making the text files is pretty clunky too ;), but it's what I'm used to. The support files for GP500 were all text based(well - spreadsheet based) so from my point of view all that's changed are the format of the files(GBP's files are better laid out and easier to work with).
In time I'll maybe knock up a couple of scripts for LW to create the files automatically. I used to have one that wrote out the camera positions to a .csv and it wasn't that complicated.
Images re-uploaded and re-linked on request. :)
I'm finding that for the USA, Switzerland and a few cities around the world, the Google data is pretty good imported directly into RTB. This is an experiment I'm working on. The resolution is sufficient to be able to fit the track surface pretty accurately, though it's no match for LIDAR of course. Main advantage is that its fast, you grab the area you want, subdivide the terrain mesh only where you want it, then lay the track out. I'm also experimenting with a high resolution inner area where the track is, and a lower res area for the distant terrain.
(http://www.mediafire.com/file/fwabn82jyns99mj/CraterLake.PNG)
How can I embed an image? Here's a link to it:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/fwabn82jyns99mj/CraterLake.PNG