[Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
Hello again, although my free time has been in short supply recently, I've been plodding on with some Blender models. I've noticed a lot of the tutorials available for blender use sub-surf techniques to get smooth results on curvy forms like cars and aircraft. Can this be used for FGFS models which will be exported to AC3D or is the sub-surf lost? - as I understand it the sub-surface algorithms are just a type of mesh smoothing operation. Or am I way off the mark here? All the best, Matthew. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 09:26:58 +, Matthew Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello again, although my free time has been in short supply recently, I've been plodding on with some Blender models. I've noticed a lot of the tutorials available for blender use sub-surf techniques to get smooth results on curvy forms like cars and aircraft. Can this be used for FGFS models which will be exported to AC3D or is the sub-surf lost? - as I understand it the sub-surface algorithms are just a type of mesh smoothing operation. Or am I way off the mark here? I don't know, to tell the truth, but all that goes out to AC3D format (and all that plib can use) is polygons, colours, and textures (one texture per object). All the best, David -- http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
I googled around on the subject and I believe that the sub-surface version of the model is only a kind of visual thing done inside blender. The objects within the model itself remain in their lower poly form through out. I've just thought that I might be able to get a really nice smooth but higher poly model by using nurbs surfaces to model half of the fuselage, say. Then I'll convert it to a mesh and duplicate, mirror and join it to make the whole thing. Does this sound reasonable? All the best, Matthew. * David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-01-06 14:10]: On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 09:26:58 +, Matthew Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello again, although my free time has been in short supply recently, I've been plodding on with some Blender models. I've noticed a lot of the tutorials available for blender use sub-surf techniques to get smooth results on curvy forms like cars and aircraft. Can this be used for FGFS models which will be exported to AC3D or is the sub-surf lost? - as I understand it the sub-surface algorithms are just a type of mesh smoothing operation. Or am I way off the mark here? I don't know, to tell the truth, but all that goes out to AC3D format (and all that plib can use) is polygons, colours, and textures (one texture per object). All the best, David -- http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 14:36:57 +, Matthew Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've just thought that I might be able to get a really nice smooth but higher poly model by using nurbs surfaces to model half of the fuselage, say. Then I'll convert it to a mesh and duplicate, mirror and join it to make the whole thing. Does this sound reasonable? I experimented with stuff like that early on, but in the end, I found the most success just building my meshes by hand. For the fuselage, I usually start with a mesh square in front view, then I split edges and move vertices until I have a cross-section of the widest part; next, I switch to side view and duplicate that square forward and backward, adjusting its height to fit the fuselage side profile; then I go back to front view and adjust the shapes of the cross-sections (also from top view, usually), then I connect them all up. A similar approach works for the wings and horizonatal stabilizer or stabilator. All the best, David -- http://www.megginson.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
On Thursday 06 January 2005 15:36, Matthew Law wrote: I googled around on the subject and I believe that the sub-surface version of the model is only a kind of visual thing done inside blender. The objects within the model itself remain in their lower poly form through out. I also thought that Bleder did the sub-surfacing in real-time. I've just thought that I might be able to get a really nice smooth but higher poly model by using nurbs surfaces to model half of the fuselage, say. Then I'll convert it to a mesh and duplicate, mirror and join it to make the whole thing. Does this sound reasonable? I just done what you describe here. One advantage of using nurbs surfaces is that you can set the resolution. So if you need a low poly model you just reset the resolution of you nurbs surface and reconvert it to a mesh. It's a good idea to keep your original nurbs surface and convert a duplicate of it. -- Roy Vegard Ovesen ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
* David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-01-06 15:00]: I experimented with stuff like that early on, but in the end, I found the most success just building my meshes by hand. For the fuselage, I usually start with a mesh square in front view, then I split edges and move vertices until I have a cross-section of the widest part; next, I switch to side view and duplicate that square forward and backward, adjusting its height to fit the fuselage side profile; then I go back to front view and adjust the shapes of the cross-sections (also from top view, usually), then I connect them all up. A similar approach works for the wings and horizonatal stabilizer or stabilator. Thanks, I'll give both techniques a try and see which one works out best for me. All the best, Matthew. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Yet another blender modelling question...
On Thursday 06 January 2005 09:26, Matthew Law wrote: Hello again, although my free time has been in short supply recently, I've been plodding on with some Blender models. I've noticed a lot of the tutorials available for blender use sub-surf techniques to get smooth results on curvy forms like cars and aircraft. Can this be used for FGFS models which will be exported to AC3D or is the sub-surf lost? - as I understand it the sub-surface algorithms are just a type of mesh smoothing operation. Or am I way off the mark here? All the best, Matthew. I've not heard of sub-surfaces but it sounds rather close to subdivision surfaces, often abbreviated to SDS. If so, and although it's specific to the software I use (Realsoft3D), you could have a look at the Subdivision Surfaces section from the manual at http://www.phnet.fi/public/realsoft/subdivision/intro.html The tutorial style and screen grabs explain it pretty well. LeeE ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d