• This topic has 170 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 3 months ago by bord.
Currently, there are 0 users and 0 guests visiting this topic.
Viewing 20 posts - 141 through 160 (of 171 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #185227
    Scottacus
    Participant
    @scottacus
    MembervipContributor

    Wow what a huge improvement in terms of game play!  Of course one Bord hour equals seven Scottacus hours so it would take me days to do what you can do in an hour and a half…

    #185238
    bord
    Moderator
    @bord
    MembervipContributorModerator

    @osujd, there are ways to package up meshes into a DIY kit I suppose. It would still require some manual work.

    If I have small changes that aren’t full-on rebuilds I usually pass them on to the table author in case they find them useful.

    #185239
    bord
    Moderator
    @bord
    MembervipContributorModerator

    pt 35 playfield rendering

    #185345
    Mr_H
    Participant
    @jhopwood
    Member

    Its coming along nicely Bord. Hey so I’m on a table and pretty much at the same stage as you in the tutorial vids. I have my prerendered playfield but I’m having problems with it looking how the actual prerendered map should be.

    I have,

    • my playfield mesh with the same settings as yours (no map, depth bias etc etc)
    • with a prerendered ‘GI on’ map on the playfield\backdrop (just for testing at the moment, I will create the ‘GI off’ later) And I have a large black dot and white dot for visual testing,
    • I have also copied the lighting from Big Shot (Ambient, Light Emiss etc)

    But when I play the table the playfield map looks darker than it should. Pretty much the same as what was happening here..

    …and as I have the playfield mesh map set to ‘none’ it appears grey but also looks like two mesh’s sitting on top of each (overlapping polygon effect) other so I see part of the playfield map and part of the playfield mesh.

    Any ideas where I have gone wrong? I have combed through the previous vids to see if I have missed something.

    Cheers.

     

     

     

    #185348
    bord
    Moderator
    @bord
    MembervipContributorModerator

    @jhopwood, a couple things you can check. It sounds like VP isn’t swapping out its native playfield for your mesh one but is displaying both. The playfield mesh is really specific in how it is named. “playfield_mesh” no variation, otherwise it will show the native VP playfield and your mesh (overlapping polygons). This would also give you the dark playfield you’re seeing in the video. If you’re sure your playfield mesh is correct, then select “playfield_mesh” in the editor and make sure your Disable Lighting option is > .25. Anything less will look very dark. I usually keep mine between .85 and 1.

    That is where I would start. Let me know how it goes and we’ll get it figured out.

    1 user thanked author for this post.
    #185350
    Mr_H
    Participant
    @jhopwood
    Member

    @bord thanks man. That was it, needed to be named exactly “playfield_mesh”. Weird though(and for anyone that might have a similar issue), I had my mesh named “Playfield_Mesh” and I changed it to all lower case. I would then deselect and then select it and it would return to “Playfield_Mesh” captial P and M would return. I tried changing a number of times and this still happened. So I deleted the primitive and created it again – which now is working. Where is “playfield_mesh” wired to? I went through your script couldn’t find it, even just had a quick look at @scottacus table ‘Grand Tour’ which looks great.

    • This reply was modified 5 months, 3 weeks ago by Mr_H.
    #185352
    bord
    Moderator
    @bord
    MembervipContributorModerator

    @bord thanks man. That was it, needed to be named exactly “playfield_mesh”. Weird though(and for anyone that might have a similar issue), I had my mesh named “Playfield_Mesh” and I changed it to all lower case. I would then deselect and then select it and it would return to “Playfield_Mesh” captial P and M would return. I tried changing a number of times and this still happened. So I deleted the primitive and created it again – which now is working. Where is “playfield_mesh” wired to? I went through your script couldn’t find it, even just had a quick look at @scottacus table ‘Grand Tour’ which looks great.

    That’s what makes implementation so specific – it is hard coded into VP to only bypass the VP playfield if “playfield_mesh” is present. No scripting necessary. Glad you got it working. Can I ask what your project is or is it a secret for now?

    Scott’s table is really awesome. He works tirelessly to make the overall experience on his games very realistic. I’m always amazed by the stuff he comes up with to improve.

    1 user thanked author for this post.
    #185354
    Mr_H
    Participant
    @jhopwood
    Member

    Just PM’d you. Yeah I’ll load it up on the cab tonight. Cant wait to feel the physics. The feeling that you and others are doing with EM’s at the moment is incredible to feel the way they are when flipping around. Such a joy, especially for me. I never had EM’s around me growing up. Would be great to have some video tutorials like these for implementing physics etc too.

    #185501
    bord
    Moderator
    @bord
    MembervipContributorModerator

    pt 36 rendering layers 3&4

    Hey, this is starting to look like a game!

    #185933
    Schreibi34
    Participant
    @schreibi34
    Member

    Great job doing the videos! :good:

    How about using a Plane with perspective UV and a render image from the Boolean PF with transparent holes? Should save some polys. I always tried to lower the polycount by unstretching the render result back to PF size in Krita so i can use a simple VPX wall for the GI-OFF PF. I won’t do that again! It’s just a pain! But using the plane might work. At least on the S34 / Herweh tables.

    #185959
    bord
    Moderator
    @bord
    MembervipContributorModerator

    Great job doing the videos! :good:

    How about using a Plane with perspective UV and a render image from the Boolean PF with transparent holes? Should save some polys. I always tried to lower the polycount by unstretching the render result back to PF size in Krita so i can use a simple VPX wall for the GI-OFF PF. I won’t do that again! It’s just a pain! But using the plane might work. At least on the S34 / Herweh tables.

    This is a really good idea. I tried it a while back and didn’t like it because it still allowed reflections over the transparent spots. That was before I was rendering all reflections except for moving pieces like drop targets. Now that I’m rendering the reflections only the holes around the drop targets would need to remain as part of the mesh.

    Thanks for challenging me on that. I will do that going forward for sure!

    #186372
    Schreibi34
    Participant
    @schreibi34
    Member

    And for the playfield_off mesh you would need no holes at all! VPX only renders reflections onto the PF not on the playfield_off. But who am i telling this!  :scratch:

    If you render the PF off image with the mesh that you have set up for no reflections on cut outs and reflections on the inserts you should be good.

    #186410
    bord
    Moderator
    @bord
    MembervipContributorModerator

    And for the playfield_off mesh you would need no holes at all! VPX only renders reflections onto the PF not on the playfield_off. But who am i telling this! :scratch:

    If you render the PF off image with the mesh that you have set up for no reflections on cut outs and reflections on the inserts you should be good.

    Great stuff, @schreibi34. This is similar to what I am doing. Saves me a separate GI off insert state (where in the case of a classic Stern the inserts are never lit when the GI is off).

    #186411
    bord
    Moderator
    @bord
    MembervipContributorModerator

    pt 37 projected textures on individual items

    #186519
    bord
    Moderator
    @bord
    MembervipContributorModerator

    pt 38 baking textures

    Different approach for elements that fall apart when being mapped from a fixed viewpoint. At very least check out the results at the end. The spinner looks awesome!

    #186594
    TerryRed
    Moderator
    @terryred
    MemberContributorModerator

     

    Bord…. your voice is like the Bob Ross of Blender tutorials!

     

     

    #186597
    Schreibi34
    Participant
    @schreibi34
    Member

    Bord…. your voice is like the Bob Ross of Blender tutorials!

    LOL!!

    #186662
    bord
    Moderator
    @bord
    MembervipContributorModerator

    Bord…. your voice is like the Bob Ross of Blender tutorials!

    LOL

    Bob Ross could nest squirrels within his denim jacket, boldly sport an anachronistic hairdo, and finish a masterpiece in 25 minutes.

    I had a hamster once, got a haircut last week, and take 25 minutes to model a spinner.

    #186663
    bord
    Moderator
    @bord
    MembervipContributorModerator

    pt 39 drop target shadows

    ONE INSTALLMENT LEFT

    ONE!

    #186784
    mistermixer
    Participant
    @mistermixer

    After covid probs it’s time to move on with my ‘blender’ speakeasy project.

    Hope the experts don’t shoot me for probably stupid questions

    Question 1 : my camera  isn’t like bords video tutorial. Don’t know how to change the ‘triangle’ side ( make it smaller ) and the other side larger

    I can rotate the camera 90 degrees but then the finished render have to be rotated 90 degrees also

    Thanx

     

     

    Attachments:
Viewing 20 posts - 141 through 160 (of 171 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

©2020 VPinBall.com

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

Create Account

The Vpinball app

FREE
VIEW