*goodness* Or Gen Textures

[Springheel]

The same idea for the media browser applies to the skin browser. They are not defined by the directory but by the skin file. All the skins are easily found in the gen "folder".

 

Interesting, I didn't realize skins did that as well. Would a mapper have a way of knowing that the model is properly set up for a gen texture? Because currently any models with skins have them appear under the 'matching skins' list. If the mapper didn't see any matching skins, it could mean the model takes gen textures, or it just might mean there are no skins for it at all.

 

 

Which seems kind of odd since he's at this stuff longer than I have. Although it did take me a while to catch on to Gildoran's reorganization. I was used to thinking in directory structures too.

 

I deal mostly with models, which don't work the same way.

[PinkDot]

Can we also put some skin information for models at the Model Gallery? Instead of writing the amount of skins available let's make the list of matching skins. I assume that this Gallery will be open to see for everybody after realesing The Mod...

[ascottk]

I'd suggest make an example PK4 of the method and put it up for download as proof of concept. If there are objections after that, we can figure 'em out after we're all on the same page (and if it's a PK4, it's easy to clean up).

I made one for Gil with an example map. I was waiting for some feedback or potential problems but he hasn't been on for a few days.

 

Interesting, I didn't realize skins did that as well. Would a mapper have a way of knowing that the model is properly set up for a gen texture? Because currently any models with skins have them appear under the 'matching skins' list. If the mapper didn't see any matching skins, it could mean the model takes gen textures, or it just might mean there are no skins for it at all.

I deal mostly with models, which don't work the same way.

 

I was thing about putting in some info in the document section or the wiki. Anything with gen_* has an associated directory. How-tos & guidlines would be helpful too but I'm waiting to see if Gil has any problems.

 

Another approach is to have some predefined entities, especially loot objects.

 

Can we also put some skin information for models at the Model Gallery? Instead of writing the amount of skins available let's make the list of matching skins. I assume that this Gallery will be open to see for everybody after realesing The Mod...

 

Or just have a list of skins with a list of models:

 

GEN SKINS:

gen/tdm_gen_bronze

gen/tdm_gen_brushedmetal

gen/tdm_gen_copper

. . .

GEN MODELS

models/darkmod/props/gen/..

..gen_bucket.lwo

..gen_goblet1.lwo

..gen_squarestreetlamp.lwo

[Gildoran]

I made one for Gil with an example map. I was waiting for some feedback or potential problems but he hasn't been on for a few days.

I'm sorry about being mostly away the past few days... I'll get to it today.

 

I do agree that it would be bad to tailor each gen skin for each model, and that we should just have gen skins that don't fit with any one model.

[Gildoran]

After looking at it, I still think that having the trim/etc all in a single texture is likely a bad idea, because it's very inconvenient for mappers. Admittedly, having it all in a single texture may be better for performance due to fewer draw calls and potentially fewer triangles, but I'm not sure that outweights the difficulting of using textures with multiple parts in a single image.

 

To see what I mean, try making a map with a single 40x40x256 beam that has the horizontal trim (the one seperating the main texture from the blocks/patterns) fit to all sides.

[OrbWeaver]

Isn't the idea that the gen textures are primarily useful for modellers, who can accurately place the UV coordinates wherever they wish, rather than mappers who would tend to use normal stock textures?

[Springheel]

If a model uvmap is set so that it includes the trim of its default gen_texture, doesn't that mean a mapper will be stuck with a trim no matter which gen_texture they switch to?

 

Their only two options would be to change the uvmap, or to have gen textures without trims (perhaps versions with and without, though that kind of defeats the space-saving aspect).

[New Horizon]

Have you guys looked at the T3 Editor to see how they did this? It's already a proven concept and a great idea for helping less experienced modelers/ mappers in their content creation and in making new skins for existing models. The great thing about it in our project is that it doesn't have to be used for everything, like it pretty much was for T3.

[SneaksieDave]

I wonder if it's possible to get skin assignment working in DarkRadiant like it did in T3Ed? I think it was, pick a texture, pick a model, alt-click the model, and the texture (skin) is applied (created).

[OrbWeaver]

I wonder if it's possible to get skin assignment working in DarkRadiant like it did in T3Ed? I think it was, pick a texture, pick a model, alt-click the model, and the texture (skin) is applied (created).

 

It could be done, but would be a bit complicated. You would have to:

 

1. Get the material from the model and the selected texture

2. Create a new skin definition that replaced the model's materials with the selected texture

3. Save the skin definition in a new file in your skins folder, and give it a unique name

4. Set the "skin" key on the model to this new skin

 

You would probably end up with an ever-increasing list of autogenerated skins in your skins directory, with names like "_darkradiant_skin14473272.skin", but the functionality is certainly possible.

[ascottk]

After looking at it, I still think that having the trim/etc all in a single texture is likely a bad idea, because it's very inconvenient for mappers. Admittedly, having it all in a single texture may be better for performance due to fewer draw calls and potentially fewer triangles, but I'm not sure that outweights the difficulting of using textures with multiple parts in a single image.

 

To see what I mean, try making a map with a single 40x40x256 beam that has the horizontal trim (the one seperating the main texture from the blocks/patterns) fit to all sides.

 

What we need to do is find a balance between what's good for mappers and what's good for modelers.

 

If the trim was built into the material, then the mapper wouldn't have to worry about trim details except for corners & stuff. The downside is if the mapper wants to change the trim. We could add a separate gen_trim category.

 

For modelers, they can already mix & match materials. For example, they can have a wooden bucket with metal trim with the existing gen_texture design. The downside of that is using only part of a 512x512 texture & if that texture is not used anywhere else in the map then that texture is fully loaded but not fully used.

 

If a model uvmap is set so that it includes the trim of its default gen_texture, doesn't that mean a mapper will be stuck with a trim no matter which gen_texture they switch to?

 

Their only two options would be to change the uvmap, or to have gen textures without trims (perhaps versions with and without, though that kind of defeats the space-saving aspect).

 

Yeah, that's a tough question. Another thing a mapper could do is cover the trim with a brush or something & add material that would complement the main material.

[New Horizon]

It could be done, but would be a bit complicated. You would have to:

 

1. Get the material from the model and the selected texture

2. Create a new skin definition that replaced the model's materials with the selected texture

3. Save the skin definition in a new file in your skins folder, and give it a unique name

4. Set the "skin" key on the model to this new skin

 

You would probably end up with an ever-increasing list of autogenerated skins in your skins directory, with names like "_darkradiant_skin14473272.skin", but the functionality is certainly possible.

 

Hmmm, but don't the skin files have to be created first? What would be nice, is if you could right click on a model, in either render view or the map view, and choose view available skins. The menu could then show the current skin (default) with a bullet next to it and then the list of available skins for that model. Perhaps a general skins list could also be there and that entry is simply stored in a gen_skins material file or something...not sure exactly if I know what I'm talking about. Heh.

[OrbWeaver]

I was specifically addressing Dave's request for an "apply arbitrary texture as model skin" feature similar to that available in T3Ed. I have not started on the general skin browser for existing models, although it will be something very similar to what you suggest (but launched through the entity inspector when examining the "skin" key).

 

The current interface for selecting a NEW model+skin looks like this:

 

[New Horizon]

I was specifically addressing Dave's request for an "apply arbitrary texture as model skin" feature similar to that available in T3Ed. I have not started on the general skin browser for existing models, although it will be something very similar to what you suggest (but launched through the entity inspector when examining the "skin" key).

 

The current interface for selecting a NEW model+skin looks like this:

 

Ahhh, gotcha. Thanks.

[SneaksieDave]

The current interface for selecting a NEW model+skin looks like this:

Niiiiice...

[ascottk]

After looking at it, I still think that having the trim/etc all in a single texture is likely a bad idea, because it's very inconvenient for mappers. Admittedly, having it all in a single texture may be better for performance due to fewer draw calls and potentially fewer triangles, but I'm not sure that outweights the difficulting of using textures with multiple parts in a single image.

 

To see what I mean, try making a map with a single 40x40x256 beam that has the horizontal trim (the one seperating the main texture from the blocks/patterns) fit to all sides.

 

Here's a small example of mapping use:

 

If the mapper wants to add trim to their map anyway, it'll take as much effort. If the mapper doesn't want trim, then they could use the middle part of the texture, although the resizing is limited vertically.

 

Besides, there's already a couple of textures already in use that use this very same layout. Look at manwall01.tga and you'll see that the similarities between both designs are very strong. A lot of mansion wall panels have trim.

 

If a model uvmap is set so that it includes the trim of its default gen_texture, doesn't that mean a mapper will be stuck with a trim no matter which gen_texture they switch to?

 

Their only two options would be to change the uvmap, or to have gen textures without trims (perhaps versions with and without, though that kind of defeats the space-saving aspect).

 

Were stuck with the current uvmap of models anyway, aren't we?

[Gildoran]

Here's a small example of mapping use:

What about things like support beams? The example I gave above of trying to texture a 40x40x256 block was intended to illustrate that having combined textures makes it difficult to texture things like that.

 

What happens when the mapper needs to fit one of the engraved patterns at the top of the texture (in previous screenshots) to an arbitrarily sized block?

 

What happens when you want to texture a simple, yet arbitrarily long pipe with one of your metal gen textures and you don't want any texture seams?

 

If the mapper wants to add trim to their map anyway, it'll take as much effort. If the mapper doesn't want trim, then they could use the middle part of the texture, although the resizing is limited vertically.

It's those limits that bother me.

 

Besides, there's already a couple of textures already in use that use this very same layout. Look at manwall01.tga and you'll see that the similarities between both designs are very strong. A lot of mansion wall panels have trim.

But those weren't created with the intention of being used to texture arbitrary things.

 

I'd be fine with the materials used for models being combined textures, but for maps combined textures are very inconvenient.

[ascottk]

What about things like support beams? The example I gave above of trying to texture a 40x40x256 block was intended to illustrate that having combined textures makes it difficult to texture things like that.

 

It's child's play.

 

What happens when the mapper needs to fit one of the engraved patterns at the top of the texture (in previous screenshots) to an arbitrarily sized block?

 

 

What happens when you want to texture a simple, yet arbitrarily long pipe with one of your metal gen textures and you don't want any texture seams?

 

One long pipe using a gen_texture & no seams.

 

It's those limits that bother me.

 

All of our other textures are not as versatile as these but they share similar limits.

 

But those weren't created with the intention of being used to texture arbitrary things.

 

You're not understanding the purpose of gen_textures. They are "gen" as in general use not "generic", as in having the potential of being used in more than one way. They are also serve specific purposes. They can be used on maps or models. You cannot say that for other textures.

 

I'd be fine with the materials used for models being combined textures, but for maps combined textures are very inconvenient.

 

I could put together a full, proof of concept map using only gen_textures. Then again, I tend to spend more time defending this idea than actually working on them. I could keep putting together examples like this post all day for counter arguments but that's only wasting my time.

[New Horizon]

Guys, he knows what he's doing. Quit debating already.

[OrbWeaver]

Gen textures sound perfectly good to me, it's not like they will replace existing textures so nobody will have to use them who doesn't want to.

[PinkDot]

My question is somehow related to the idea of this topic.

 

What should I do in order to use some of textures for brushes on my models? Or if I create some architectural models, what should I do (I mean which files where to put) to make them available for mappers so they can build seamlessly with brushes and models?

[ascottk]

My question is somehow related to the idea of this topic.

 

What should I do in order to use some of textures for brushes on my models? Or if I create some architectural models, what should I do (I mean which files where to put) to make them available for mappers so they can build seamlessly with brushes and models?

I put together some info about gen_textures/models here:

http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?showtopic=4480

I'm not sure it's a good idea to put these models in a separate place. I don't think most mappers will choose objects for their map based solely on whether they use gen textures or not. If I want a light, I'll look in the lights folder. If I see a light that takes gen textures (by looking for names with a gen_ in front of them) then I can choose to use it. But going to a props/gen folder just to see if there are any lights in it seems counter-intuitive.

I ended up putting the handrails into the architectural folder. I might rearrange the others eventually & perhaps add them to a def file with appropriate defaults.

 

Once I get the AI stuff fairly ironed out I'd like to expand the content. Maybe put an advanced editor texture tutorial together too.