How Do I Reduce The Number Of Groups In A Model

[Derek]

Can you see your asset in the Blueprint editor?
Also try moving your detail slider to the right as it is not at 10. (bottom right orange slider)
It could be the issue.

d

[TheKman]

Can you see your asset in the Blueprint editor?
Also try moving your detail slider to the right as it is not at 10. (bottom right orange slider)
It could be the issue.

d

OK, going to sound like I'm a REAL clueless moron.... (Keep in mind I'm new to RW/TS)

How do I view it in the Blueprint editor???

Answer to your second question. I slide the detail slider all the way to 10. Still can't see it. Could be the model has too much detail??? I honestly don't buy that. It's not a highly complex model. Pic enclosed of model stats in SU.

[mrennie]

Instead of us just guessing at what's wrong, I think the easiest thing to do now is for you to send me your 3DC model and the .ace textures, and I'll have a look at it and explain how to fix it. I'll pm you.

[TheKman]

Instead of us just guessing at what's wrong, I think the easiest thing to do now is for you to send me your 3DC model and the .ace textures, and I'll have a look at it and explain how to fix it. I'll pm you.

I sent you the files you asked for in your PM.

Thanks for a helping hand.

I'm feeling dejected and like a moron for not being able to figure out the problem... I know I shouldn't fell that way, but I do.

[JerryC]

Ok, i'm going to double down on my assertions that 3DCrafter is an amatuer program that is completely inferior to all other modelling programs.

Let me say first though that I greatly respect Mike Rennie. He is the Obi-Wan of train modelling, and he is the only person to my knowledge that has breached the DTG Partner Program using models made in 3DCrafter. Therein lies the problem. The reason why Mike has been able to get his model to Steam is because he is a great artist who can make up for the program's extreme shortcomings through artwork. However, if you are not on DaVinci's level, then don't expect the results from 3DC that he has gotten.

When I was using 3DC, it was all I knew, so it was great. I had never used anything else, so I did not know that constant program crashes, extreme memory leaks, non-standard material slotting, 24 group limits, losing your registration every other use, no shadow baking, losing the linking to your entire texture map, no ability to assing multiple materials and save them for later use, no multiple modeling scenes, and 50k poly export limits were not normal for a modeling program. I also didn't anticipate that once I revealed to DTG that my model was made with 3DC that they would shoot it down like a Guadalcanal Zero. Once I did start using other programs, I found that I could build a substantial amount of real-estate in Blender while waiting for 3DC to go through a crash-and-recover cycle, which it did about five times per work session.

Bottom line is, if you are just starting out modeling, there is no reason to use 3DCrafter. Even with v9.3, which I do have, the program is unstable, and so-called shadow baking still requires another program (POV Ray) and has to have extensive corrections once it is mapped. And if you even get as far as baking, you will need a memory extender (CCExplorer) to modify the program so it doesn't crash while exporting large models once you hit 1GB of memory.

It takes only a little more time to learn Blender (Free) or Max ($4k) and you get so much more in terms of tools and add-ons. But if you enjoy hammering nails with your forehead, be my guest, and please, send pictures!

As for the original subject, you can place 24 groups within each of the first 24 groups, and so on. But you are still limited in the BPE to 256 nodes.

EDIT: And one last nail in the 3DC coffin - no FBX export, which is native to Blender - meaning no models in Train Sim World.

[mrennie]

OK, you were nearly there!

The problem was that you didn't have any of the Rail Sim custom fields defined for the textures, but don't worry, it's very easy to add them in one go, without even needing to reapply the textures. Here's how:

1. Open your model in 3DC.
2. Plug-Ins > Trainworks > Train Simulator Wizard
3. A pop-up message will appear saying "Two new custom material "Tx Alpha" and "Alpha PR" have been created. Default values have been set. ..."
4. Close the pop-up (click OK).
5. Close the wizard (click Cancel).

That's it.

You can check that the custom fields now exist if you use the pippet (the material sampling tool) on one of the model's textured faces and then go to the Material Palette, Custom Fields button (third from the right) and look at what it's put into Rail Sim. It should say TexDiff. That's the default shader (and the most basic of all shaders).

[Derek]

good work Mike.

d

[Chacal]

The thought of Mike modeling the Connie on 3DC causes my brain to blue screen.


Now is a good time, for the benefit of people new to modeling, to say that Blender has evolved a lot in the last few years.
It had a well-deserved reputation of a confusing and messy UI, a steep learning curve, accessible to experts only.
The current version is surprisingly easier to use.

When I see someone having problems with Blender, most of the time the root problem is the user doesn't understand the basic concepts of 3D design.

[buzz456]

And where oh sage one does one pick up the concept of 3D design?

[Chacal]

One might try the Google oracle, oh enlightened one.

[TheKman]

Mike got my model working. It was just that one little item I didn't do to begin and still did wrong even after it was explained. I'll get that figured out. I don't think I saved after exiting the wizard before I exported. I'll see with my next model.

I'm still going to use SU. That's my baby. The other programs are just not my cup of tea. For those who like them more power to you. Am I banging my head against a wall? Going the hard way?? I don't think so. Others may disagree. We all have our opinion on what the best 3d program is just like we all cuss and discuss which is the better sim. Comes down to what works for the individual. What works for some may not work for others.

Building in SU was not the problem. The problem was figuring out 3DC and maybe I would have been just fine if I could have found tutorials on exporting that were up to date (I never found 1 !!) and not using earlier versions of 3DC. Night and day between what was used in the tutorials compared to 3DC 9.3.

9.3 is laid out completely different. And to a degree, it works different compared to earlier versions. All just my opinion.

Thanks to all for your input even when it really sounded like I had no idea what I was doing. In fact, I didn't know what I was doing. It was a whole new ball game for yours truly and 1 mistake along the way is not too bad. Well, actually two mistakes. I did have the ACE files in the wrong place in the source folder.

I'll post some pics in awhile.

[Chacal]

I must admit I like SU a lot for most of my work (not RW-related). This is also a tool that has evolved, especially with regard to precision.
It's entirely different from the other apps, but when you get to understand how it works it becomes natural.

[mrennie]

A word of warning about 3DC 9.3 ... there are some things that are better in 9.3, such as the ability to do shadow-baking (it works perfectly for me 99% of the time, rarely needing any touching up, as long as the model is correct - if it gives strange results, it's almost always because of a hidden flaw in the model's geometry), but it also crashes doing some simple operations that work fine in 9.2.2. So, I tend to use 9.2.2. most of the time and then use 9.3 only for the shadow-baking.