Jump to content

A.M.U.R.E Pod


tabaal2

should the internals bee 2 man or 3man  

114 members have voted

  1. 1. should the internals bee 2 man or 3man



Recommended Posts

Here are some parts that are ready and i'm working on a few more for my command pod parts

The full mod part list will include docking port/parachute, command pod, heat shield, service module, solar panels, engine and fairings

VOTE!!

Pole Tipped towards the 4 man capsule. so my next project will be to finish the service module and then start with the internals

v0dVH9O.png?1

ZElMUuM.png?1

9rLYkBI.jpg?1

Bkg1plj.png?1

eN48VPJ.jpg?1

XHk1rFS.jpg?1

Here is the more stock like texture that will bee released soon

Javascript is disabled. View full album
.

License:

A.M.U.R.E is licenced under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) license

Mediafire

Download

smaller texture size

Download

NOW! with added additions. more stock like command pod and docking port and a flag

Here is the pre release

Edited by tabaal2
Progres
Link to comment
Share on other sites

did you extrude and/or chamfer edges?

the first two looks like a long oblique triangle causing the artifact at the corner where the black/white heat tiles meet. add a little more division and try switching triangulating direction in that area.

can't really make out what the last image is doing without seeing the wire frames, looks like a smoothing group issue. try splitting the black tiles to a different group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can also try hardening the edge where the cockpit is recessed. Basically the entire edge that surrounds the black section around the canopy. I would also do the same for the top of the cone where your docking port attaches and the bottom just after the ring of tiles.

That might not be the correct terminology for your modeling software BTW but how the surface is shaded is influenced by whether the edges are hard or soft. When you make cuts or recesses into an area that's soft (or smooth shaded) it's a good idea to explicitly mark the section that has to be hard or it will confuse KSP's renderer (and maybe the modeler)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're still running into problems later you could post an image of the wireframe, it does just look like a weird smoothing behaviour so it should be easy enough to fix.

Also are you using a normalmap?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does your model lights correctly in Blender when you display material in your viewport shading?

Here's my Blender check list when I have this kind of shading problems :

- Check normal orientation (but you did that already ;) )

- Check if you don't have overlapping vertices, edges, or full extruded and unmoved faces. (use "remove double").

- Check lighting with flat shading.

- Check lighting with smooth shading.

- Check your edge flow (triangles or very acute angles = weird shading effect when smoothed*)

- Check your EdgeSpilt modifier (Edge Angle) if you use one and your Sharp Edges assignment.

- Check your EdgesCreases if you used a unapplied SubSurface modifier (but you didn't, right? ;) ;) ).

* Weird shading effect with a "coplanar inward extrusion" with smooth and no Edge Split :

kmSnoJu.jpg

I hope all those checking will fix the problem :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait a minute, I took a second look at the photos. Are the UV co-ordinates flipped for the problem areas? This might cause the normal map to look like the light is weird. Do you get the same issue if you export without the normal map as a plain old KSP/diffuse?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use to teach modeling, however I am not familar with blender. If you want, I could try to fix it in maya and send it back to you with a proper explanation of the problem.

It would have to wait monday, I uninstalled maya on my personal computer...

Edit: I should have look the date on your post... glad that you found the solution!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man.. you really need to do some serious poly reduction and optimization. 200+ MB for a few parts is a killer for KSP..

But they are indeed high quality.. GREAT WORK!!! Thanks.

The models are quite fine, not too big. They don't take up that much space.

However, the textures are really, really big. The docking port has not one, but two files at 4096*4096 pixels (docking port 2.mbm, Parachute.mbm), and four files at 1024*1024 pixels (docking port_bump.mbm, Parachute_bump.mbm, parachute123.mbm and parachute123_bump.mbm). This is really big and takes up a lot of texture space.

The two 4096x files can each be reduced to 1024x with little noticeable loss of quality in-game, docking port_bump.mbm and Parachute_bump.mbm can be reduced to 512x, and parachute123_bum.mbm can be reduced to 256x with only little loss of quality.

My suggestion to tabaal2 is to make two seperate downloads; one in high quality (the current download) and one in reduced quality.

If any users want to scale the textures down by themselves, there's two options:

1: Use mbm2png (search for it on Google, it's only available on a website that the forums won't allow me to link to). It can convert the .mbm files in this addon to editable .png files. Then use Photoshop, paint.NET, GIMP or another image editing software to resize the image.

2: Use dds4ksp to convert all the textures in the folder to .dds format, then resize as in option 1. This is considerably faster and easier than option 1, but it only works on windows and you'll also need to install the DDSLoader plugin. It also loads textures faster, so start-up times will be reduced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...