A word about my 2.5d trees...
-
...explode!
Playing with Twilight I've noticed several of my previous trees were doing strange things, but in full model context the scope wasn't obvious. (Others I believe have had the same problem in other render apps...?) So doing the first render of the first tree of the new set of PR image trees hit me pretty hard:
But exploding the image (only the image inside the leaf-bunch component...which are grouped together inside the whole tree component), then hidding the four edges of course, solves the problem:
For some reason, doing this will also speed up the AA phase of rendering (4 times faster on this little image)...but it does add 30+ faces and 120+ edges per tree to your model, so only you know when it is time to explode the leaf-bunch image.I've also noticed, but haven't yet proven with certainty, that creating the original tree in SU7 alleviates the problem without exploding the image...? Anyway, I will create future tree sets in SU7 (saved back to SU6 I suppose) and with Twilight am now able to verify the rendering results of my product, thank you very much.
-
Hi Tom,
I also had some weird results with mirrored image entities in Twilight - see my response there.
-
Tom, mate is that the same tree in both images?
Strange results indeed, I know there was a battle in the maxwell exporter with any use of instances where mirrored items would break apart when exported. It seemed to be a SU related issue and one that you may have found now fixed in V7.1!!
Not sure with twilight and instance support? Are these just direct copies or instance enabled versions?
I also ask if it is the same tree in each render as the render quality also seems to have failed (definition of the leaves) in the first set! Not sure though I'm seeing that correctly though!
Mate I dont think 30 faces and 140 edges is a big increase! I know dale (whaat) and I think in testing and discussion of ways to speed SU's engine, commented that the use of components where for small levels of geometry (1 face / 4 edges eg) is actually more of a processing cost than gain!
I don't know if you have tested the speed relationships in nav and refresh within SU with both versions to note the differences when using multiple copies?? Would be interesting!
Is there anywhere to download both 6 and 7.1 versions so I can see if they have the same issue when exported from SU > MR? MR-V2 now has the ability to use clips direct from alpha that it didn't previously - thank god! Though the use of instances is a bit of a waste as in any case of the instances intersecting (which is near impossible to avoid in a tree as you would know) draws and rendertimes close to a hault!
-
Hi Richard,
If you are interested, here are the downloads for older versions (well, back to 5) of SU (Pro only):
http://sketchup.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=60107 -
@richard said:
Tom, mate is that the same tree in both images? Yes!
Strange results indeed, I know there was a battle in the maxwell exporter with any use of instances where mirrored items would break apart when exported. It seemed to be a SU related issue and one that you may have found now fixed in V7.1!! Huh?
Not sure with twilight and instance support? Are these just direct copies or instance enabled versions? Nothing done for Twilight...just copies of the SU component (copied in SU).
I also ask if it is the same tree in each render as the render quality also seems to have failed (definition of the leaves) in the first set! Not sure though I'm seeing that correctly though! Same model...just didn't wait for AA to finish for the first one (obvious why? :`)
Mate I dont think 30 faces and 140 edges is a big increase! I know dale (whaat) and I think in testing and discussion of ways to speed SU's engine, commented that the use of components where for small levels of geometry (1 face / 4 edges eg) is actually more of a processing cost than gain! When I started doing these trees the operating theory was to make everything copied more than once a component...and from personal experience in SU5, the exploded leaf-bunch images did indeed slow the model down once a forest of them were added. Also, my early trees didn't use the greyscale png to change colors easily...so I wanted components to change out the different seasonal pngs easily.
I don't know if you have tested the speed relationships in nav and refresh within SU with both versions to note the differences when using multiple copies?? Would be interesting! I have been suspecting since the release of SU6: there is no total speed difference from SU5, the newer versions just orbit faster then make you wait longer for shadows and edges to catch up...but I haven't done any real testing.
Is there anywhere to download both 6 and 7.1 versions so I can see if they have the same issue when exported from SU > MR? MR-V2 now has the ability to use clips direct from alpha that it didn't previously - thank god! Though the use of instances is a bit of a waste as in any case of the instances intersecting (which is near impossible to avoid in a tree as you would know) draws and rendertimes close to a hault! Really don't understand this bit...but I can say none of my leaf-bunch images intersect or touch at any point.
-
@gaieus said:
Hi Richard,
If you are interested, here are the downloads for older versions (well, back to 5) of SU (Pro only):
http://sketchup.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=60107No sorry mate I meant Toms V6 and V7 trees, I've kept all SU versions since 3 I think!
-
@ Tom
Mate I meant that some issues where discovered when exporting from SU to maxwell when using flipped or copied instances, they deemed it to be a SU issue and found a way to overcome it however!
Possibly you have stumbled upon the fact this has now been fixed in V7!
I would understand the trees would not be such a drag on SUV7 due to the engine changes made for naving in large models, though as said bugger if by exploding older versions you lose your intended functionality of seasonal change!
I wonder if all building needs to be done in 7 or a component from your V6 version could have another group added and made to new component then exploded and the old component retained? Just a shame if they isn't a simple work around to get the functionality back easily!
-
Thanks Richard...I'll just have to do more playing with SU7. I never really used SU6 except to beta test and play a bit with LightUp (which had the same trouble with some of the trees)...all of my trees, as with all of my modeling to date, were done in SU5.
They still may be done that way since it's starting to look like exploded images is the way to go...using components, though, may remain as well since greyscale doesn't really work for the PR intent and I will maybe need to switch out pngs per the seasons.
-
Tom, someone's probably asked this already, but could you change leaf color by making them dynamic components? ...like Sang - clicking on him with the interact tool changes his clothes colors... (of course then you'd have to use 7 Pro)
-
@d12dozr said:
Tom, someone's probably asked this already, but could you change leaf color by making them dynamic components? ...like Sang - clicking on him with the interact tool changes his clothes colors... (of course then you'd have to use 7 Pro)
Mate I think the issue there is that each map has to be in the model and that can cause a fair drag alone on SU!
@Tom, mate some renderers will accept the colour edits from SU and yet others as you know wont! Though the option to use a better PNG direct to the editor would in most cases produce a better result!
-
Marcus...Richard is right (the reason I never got into using DC's for anything): besides, replacing a tree component with another in SU is so easy I personally don't think it's necessary. My comment for using leaf-bunch components was about the time I save building the trees in the first place.
Richard...no I don't know: some render apps don't recognize SU color changes? Which ones?
-
Vray for SU
-
Thanks guys, that makes sense now
-
Tom mate I'm not certain now which ones do and don't I know maxwell, indigo and Artantis do! Though as said I think in most cases people will link to a shader built more for the purpose which means in most cases swapping the maps in the model isn't necessary!
Advertisement