AI modellers? Need shadow model in thief_mb\fbx_import.mb

[Domarius]

The shadow mesh for the thief (models_src\thief_mb) is missing from fbx_import.mb, but is probably present in the other mesh files in that folder.

 

Do we currently have any modellers who can work on AI? I haven't seen ascottk recently.

 

If not then I guess I will have to adopt this role too and try to work out how to get the shadow mesh back into the thief model.

[ascottk]

Don't worry about. Animations don't need the shadowmesh.

[Domarius]

Wow there you are - that was quick!

 

Ah - well the shadow is definetly missing from the mesh. I guess fbx_import.mb has nothing to do with it.

 

http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?s=&am...st&p=123307

 

All I know is when I ran exportModels and did a diff of the tdm_ai_thief.md5mesh between my local copy and the server, it showed number of meshes was 6 in my local, and 7 on the server copy, and at the bottom of the file was a clearly deleted mesh section.

 

(I was doing a diff to get the materials back in the mesh. They were all wrong after I ran exportModels)

[Domarius]

I realise now that it wouldn't be fbx_import.mb - it would be whatever mesh the def file is pointing to, which is tdm_ai_thief.mb

 

So for some reason the tdm_ai_thief.mb is missing the shadow mesh and therefore out of date with the tdm_ai_thief.md5mesh. I wonder what happened to it?

[ascottk]

Are you using the source mb file on svn? Everything checks out on my end. It should be https://darkmod.homelinux.com/svn/model_src...mb/thiefmesh.mb

[Domarius]

Yes it does use the latest thiefmesh.mb from SVN, I just checked. (Sorry, I quoted the wrong name in the last post because I was typing from work and thought I remembered it was tdm_ai_mesh.mb)

 

Ah, I downgraded to the previous version of thiefmesh.mb from the server, and tdm_ai_thief.md5mesh it now has numMeshes 7 at the top again.

 

The latest thiefmesh.mb reduces this to numMeshes 6.

 

If you know exactly what mesh is missing in the latest version and say that it's okay, I'll take your word for it. It's just that I mentioned this issue over in the animation thread and Nyar said the shadow was missing... I haven't seen it myself and don't know how he was able to view the shadow of the model. It would be good if he could post here and say how.

[greebo]

You can use this to enable the thirdperson view and the player shadow:

 

pm_thirdperson 1

g_showPlayerShadow 1

[ascottk]

Yes it does use the latest thiefmesh.mb from SVN, I just checked. (Sorry, I quoted the wrong name in the last post because I was typing from work and thought I remembered it was tdm_ai_mesh.mb)

 

Ah, I downgraded to the previous version of thiefmesh.mb from the server, and tdm_ai_thief.md5mesh it now has numMeshes 7 at the top again.

 

The latest thiefmesh.mb reduces this to numMeshes 6.

 

If you know exactly what mesh is missing in the latest version and say that it's okay, I'll take your word for it. It's just that I mentioned this issue over in the animation thread and Nyar said the shadow was missing... I haven't seen it myself and don't know how he was able to view the shadow of the model. It would be good if he could post here and say how.

There should be no missing meshes even with the latest svn source.

[Domarius]

@greebo - Thanks.

 

It's confirmed. Old thiefmesh.mb has a shadow, new thiefmesh.mb doesn't I saw it myself.

 

Revert to old thiefmesh.mb, exportModels, player has shadow. Update to latest thiefmesh.mb, exportModels, player is missing shadow, except for hands, they have a shadow.

[ascottk]

@greebo - Thanks.

 

It's confirmed. Old thiefmesh.mb has a shadow, new thiefmesh.mb doesn't I saw it myself.

 

Revert to old thiefmesh.mb, exportModels, player has shadow. Update to latest thiefmesh.mb, exportModels, player is missing shadow, except for hands, they have a shadow.

I updated from svn, double & triple checked, & to make sure I updated again. It's still right where I left it

[Springheel]

I can confirm that the thief model no longer has a shadowmesh.

 

Since the animations that were uploaded aren't working properly anyway, perhaps we should revert the changes back until these issues are sorted out (I'd like to make another general plug for testing before uploading)?

[ascottk]

For one thing the mesh did not need to be updated! People need to revert to a revision prior to 3289.

[sparhawk]

It would be easier, if poeple who know what's up, would simply commit the last working mesh as the current one, instead of requiring all people to revert to this version.

Reverting to a version is also not advisable, because SVN only keeps a complete state on the repository. Thus reverting to this revisions, would mean that all other stuff is also lost.

[Springheel]

You can't just revert specific folders? That's annoying.

[ascottk]

Okay, the working mesh is up. Next time, Dom, only commit the changed animations, not the whole directory!

[ascottk]

The source mb does have a shadowmesh but it's not rigged to the skeleton. I reverted the thiefmesh.mb to the previous one with the shadowmesh that's rigged & did a test export. The reverted source mb is on svn.

[Domarius]

Okay, the working mesh is up. Next time, Dom, only commit the changed animations, not the whole directory!

No, the problem was the source mesh, and it needed to be fixed. If I just commited my new animation, it would have been broken.

 

Every time you run exportModels, it has to use the .mb files, you know this. So what has happened before I did my anim is that the thief md5s have been created from the first thiefmesh.mb, which is a 7 mesh AI. Since then, you uploaded a new thiefmesh.mb with only 6 meshes, missing a shadow mesh. Yes it was you, SVN doesn't lie, so don't complain it didn't need updating when you were the one to do it.

 

I updated from SVN like I should, and ran exportModels. This created animations from the new thiefmesh.mb for the first time, making all my animations referencing a 6 mesh AI.

 

Now if I just committed my new animation, referencing a 6 mesh AI file, with a 7 mesh AI file on the server, all the vertexes numbering would be completely different, all the weighting would be fucked up and we would see some sort of distorted mess instead of a sideways running animation.

 

But on my local side, it would have looked fine, because my local copy exported the mesh and animations all from a 6 mesh AI file. Whilst on the sever, they would all be all 7 mesh files except for the new one I added.

 

This is why committing just one animation file is bad. Problems like this will be overlooked.

 

Next time, just work with the team to fix the problem, instead of shifting blame around. You'll have to learn that for the workplace.

[New Horizon]

Dom. Can we keep the chest thumping to PM's? Ascottk didn't say anything to warrant this lengthy response. If you are aware of something that he wasn't aware of at the time he posted, just say so.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Crispy]

Let's all cut down on the snippiness, shall we? (Not speaking to any one person in particular.)

 

(Geddit? Cut down? Snippiness? Geddit? Geddit? )

[ascottk]

No, the problem was the source mesh, and it needed to be fixed. If I just commited my new animation, it would have been broken.

 

Every time you run exportModels, it has to use the .mb files, you know this. So what has happened before I did my anim is that the thief md5s have been created from the first thiefmesh.mb, which is a 7 mesh AI. Since then, you uploaded a new thiefmesh.mb with only 6 meshes, missing a shadow mesh. Yes it was you, SVN doesn't lie, so don't complain it didn't need updating when you were the one to do it.

One thing, I said the source mesh did have a shadowmesh, I did not check to see if was rigged so that's my fault & I did not deny anything.

 

Another thing, if the animations' joints match the mesh's joints exactly then there's no problem with committing a single animation if it matches the mesh's joints. I did this all of the time. None of the animations have a shadowmesh.

 

The source mesh w/o the shadowmesh that was rigged caused no problems, aside from the missing shadowmesh. The 6 submesh model had the same exact joints as the 7 submesh model, so committing an animation with the same exact joints would have caused no problems.

 

Now if I just committed my new animation, referencing a 6 mesh AI file, with a 7 mesh AI file on the server, all the vertexes numbering would be completely different, all the weighting would be fucked up and we would see some sort of distorted mess instead of a sideways running animation.

Get this, most of the AI share the same animations, they use the citywatch's animations. Do they share the same vertex numbering? No. That's why I used the def file's "addoptions -keep *joints*" so we can share animations.

 

This is why committing just one animation file is bad. Problems like this will be overlooked.

As long as the animation joints match the mesh, then there's no problem. As I said, I did this all of the time.

 

Next time, just work with the team to fix the problem, instead of shifting blame around. You'll have to learn that for the workplace.

I spent more time getting this stuff to work so I know the ins & outs of AI models and animations. You have not spent enough time on these to know any better.

 

I did not intend this post to flame you but there's a lot of information in your posts that will mislead other people who want the maya>doom 3 work flow.

 

Besides, this is fixed now. Let's move on.

[Domarius]

@ascottk - Yes you are correct, and thanks for explaining all that, I think I will make some additions to the Wiki. The problem stemmed from the source mesh being incorrect, I took the wrong action in response to it, but it's been tracked down and fixed, so it's all good.

 

@NH - actually the length was all about the technical details, which I needed to discuss in order to learn. Unfortunately there were a couple of harsh words included.

 

ascottk, those harsh words were innapropriate and I apologise. I have some explaining to do;

Next time, Dom, only commit the changed animations, not the whole directory!

exportModels will only export animations that have changed. But since I was exporting from a different mesh than the existing anims, ALL the anims were changed, they all had red SVN icons next to them. So the whole directory DID need uploading. So I felt a little bit chastised by your exclamation mark there But now I know that it's not normal for all the files to change like this when running exportModels if I've only changed one animation. oDDity had told me a while back (before he knew any better obviously) that this happens sometimes and so you always need to upload the whole folder.

[ascottk]

exportModels will only export animations that have changed. But since I was exporting from a different mesh than the existing anims, ALL the anims were changed, they all had red SVN icons next to them. So the whole directory DID need uploading. So I felt a little bit chastised by your exclamation mark there But now I know that it's not normal for all the files to change like this when running exportModels if I've only changed one animation. oDDity had told me a while back (before he knew any better obviously) that this happens sometimes and so you always need to upload the whole folder.

Yeah, it's a pain once I moved the source files when I was reorganizing. As long as the md5anim joints match the md5mesh then a whole directory commit isn't needed. This happened to me when started using the svn sources.

 

Once a def file option is changed, like moving the -dest directory, then doom3 will export everything. The trick to that, I think, is to make a temporary edit with notepad of the md5anims (put a space in then take it out, or add a comment), then that'll fool d3 into not export. I think it's time stamped. Don't quote me on this though.

 

& I started an animation info wiki page:

http://www.thirdfilms.com/darkwiki/index.p...ion_Information

[Domarius]

I did some re-structuring to this page and added additional info under the Exporting Models section

http://www.thirdfilms.com/darkwiki/index.p...Anims_into_Doom

[Domarius]

& I started an animation info wiki page:

http://www.thirdfilms.com/darkwiki/index.p...ion_Information

Ah ok - don't know if you've already linked this somewhere else but I linked to this on the Animation main page now

http://www.thirdfilms.com/darkwiki/index.php?title=Animation

 

 

Nobody say "Awww look at them making up..." Shut up.