SimFox's non-Asian BATs

[vester_DK 477]

When I saw this, I came to think of the tower in the center of Warszawa:

[SimFox 802]

Solo:

Both. Russia is going through consumerism frenzy now. Real incomes are growing by 30% a year, Consumer credit are now readily available. Plus Moscow is a city on a scale not much seen in Europe - everything is huge. It is much more akin to Sao Paulo. Size matters over there. Hummers on 20 lane avenues look line ants. And billboards could be 20-30 floors tall! You have to be big to be noticed. But amazingly you can turn of those major streets and you'll find quiet, centuries old streets lined with old mansions and blossoming linden trees. But you also should remember this is advertising, not a fan picture gallery of sorts. Sony paid really BIG$$$ to have it console displayed so prominently right next to the Kremlin.

Here more of the sort (just love this picture - it is soo Moscow):

Vester_DK:

No surprise there - those are from same " _fcksavedurl="">

Vester_DK:

No surprise there - those are from same "stable" so to say... You have to divorce yourself from the indeological link attached, and then you, like they did in Poland recognize the building for what it is - architectural monumet - protected in it's entirety (exterior and interior) by the Polish law

[SimFox 802]

BTW here first test of that UWV unwrapped RED.

It is very preliminary as of yet, but what do you think, does it break monotony of the wall sufficiently? Or should I make "panels" smaller?

Also do you think effect should be equally visible in sun and shade? Or should it be different? Where should it be more pronounced? In Shade or on the sun light surface of the wall?

[autoVino 26]

I think it's looking very good, the UWV unwrap with the panels makes the walls look much better, the only think I notice is that the curves section at the top of the building (especially in the shadow) looks like it has panels that streach across the whole curve, which doesn't fit in with the rest of the curved section of the building.

Other than that it looks great!

[SimFox 802]

Well, that isn't quite finished yet, It was a first test of the technique. And naturally along the way I made few mistakes, or made thing not quite the way they should have been. But that's the point of learning!

[nofunk 1,933]

Wow, that looks fantastic! The paneling adds a lot of good visual interest to the walls. I think the current panel size is just right; I wouldn't change it.

Regarding light/shadow: while I suppose the effect should be a little less visible on the shadowed portions, I personally don't think it's worth being critical. If you can easily tweak the UVW unwrap to achieve that effect, great! If not, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

[Cockatoo 2,257]

Wow simfox! NICE JOB. That red/green/blue/yellow tower that you've got there looks great! Could fit quite nicely into any city around the world, and that Russian building, wow. Looks intimidating in real life but your version is coming along very nicely. Keep up the fantastic work.

[SimFox 802]

Here is a little update on "Red" Finally I got roof done... Still not sure about the texture, but I spent the whole day today building it.

Any one got any suggestion?

PS

There is little difference between those shots, as I've been experimenting with different settings for ground plane, the texture on it is same though...

[autoVino 26]

this has surpassed the simcity standard.  It may look too good for the game.

[crazyarchitect 7]

You have some really good stuff on here, the Red/Blue/Green/Yellow towers look awesome, and the hotel look great as well

[toxicpiano 125]

It looks absolutely fantastic, I don't think it's possible to get it better than that.

[Fledgeling 1]

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO wow thats really nice.

[nofunk 1,933]

Ooooooooooooooooh.......

(How's that for a comment?!)

[kd5rax 82]

Verrry nice.  Only thing i can add is make the tile line so smal that they could only be seen in zoom 5 (like in real life you couldnt see the division untill really really close) and then make the division a bump map and have it indented instead of color (that way it replicates the way the light would reflect of the edge.)

[SimFox 802]

KD5rax:

I believe that line would go away at Zoom4 as presently it is LES than 1 pixel wide - it is only visible due to very aggressive anti aliasing used.

And about bump, well, you are very naive about ability and value of this method... at least in SC scale it pretty useless as it is a very crud effect. Think of it in order to get bump showing you would need at least 2 or even 3 whole pixels, now do you know what those 3 pixels would mean in SC4 scale? Even at zoom5 it would be about 20-30cm!!! Now how ould such a seam look? Some rendering engines nave fare more advanced version of such a rendering time effect - like microtriangular displacement etc, but not MR, at least not yet.

[Jasoncw 11,933]

I've tried using bump maps for these types of seams before, and I've found that just including it in the bitmap was more effective, but I do think that your lines are too thick.  The lines should each be at least a solid pixel wide, and all together they should be much thinner.  You need a much higher resolution texture.  You'll need to redo the lines, but I think it's worthwhile.

[Mr. Glamazon 9]

Those flat blocks have a great look to them! In my opinion, I think they would make a great pack, like four or five of them of different colours all together. It would give the user a lot more variety, but maintain the same look. The lines break up the fa

[SimFox 802]

Jason:

about bumps - can you show results?

Also you think my lines are too thick?? Let me get it straight - you say that lines should be a pixel wide, right? I mentioned in my previous post that those are LESS then a pixel wide, and you go on and say That I should make them thinner? So make up your mind - should they be "at least a pixel wide" or thinner then a <1. You don't see contradiction?And about texture size... well that one is 2048 pixel and on it the seam lines are 1 pixel - that translates into about 0.4 pixel - total hight is 803 pixels, 2025 pixels is used in texture space. Texture is square of 2048x2048.

So exactly what part should I redo?

btw in CS4 1 pixel is about 20cm!!! so going sub-pixel is essential.

Mr Glamazon:

he he he,

about numbers, hat was my pet idea for quite some time :-)

btw I have even implemented it in some way in the newest version of this very building, not fro numbering of the tower themselves, but non the less, you'll see in a day or so..

Well since I was a great advocate of Glassy look, doing that "stone" building (hotel Ukraina") was sort of test for me, do I get the look of something totally different. I'll finish it. Most of the modeling is done, Now the question how do I proceede with it - what sort of material, mapping, texturing.. Also I've more or less model it to be a replica. But it is closing or already closed. the building was recently sold for wooping 250 million$ and that not he whole thing, just the tower part, and it gonna be redeveloped into some very hight star rated hotel, I mean higher than 5.

So I though to take an artistic license and do something along the lines - like some swanky roof terraces and patios,, turn yard into something remarkable - not quite sure exactly what. but something that would fit the "Millionaire Fair"

[Jasoncw 11,933]

Unfortunately I didn't save any of the screenshots, and I don't feel like going back and setting everything back up again, but what happens is what you said.  By the time the lines are dark enough to be visible at zoom 5, they end up being too thick, even after making the bump map settings as extreme as possible.  And of course it also increased the rendering time.

To give each line it's own pixel doesn't mean to ultimately make the lines thicker, it means to make the bitmap big enough that each line can have its own pixel.

You end up with more refined looking lines.  I also recommend giving each panel a slightly different value (maybe not as extreme as that building, you said you want it to look new) to make it look a little more "finished".

I remember seeing a limit with the textures, but there has to be a way to get bigger bitmaps.  I don't think 3ds max would build in a limitation like that.  Also, for these textures you don't need to worry about the image dimensions being in a power of 2.  If you can't find how to get a bigger bitmap, you can cut the object into two pieces, and do it that way.  Since you're working with panels, it shouldn't be too hard to make them blend together.

Also, the resolution settings in Photoshop don't have any meaning unless you're sending it to a printer.  When I say resolution I mean the resolution of pixels on the surface you're texturing.  Even though about .2 meters is one pixel rendered at zoom 5, I think making everything at a higher resolution than that is simpler on the mind.

[bixel 1,224]

Finish it already!!!

[mightygoose 92]

my largest texture used in 3dsmax would be the wraparound for the IMAX, 4040x560

[SimFox 802]

I guess it is communication problem, as you don't seem to get at all what I'm trying to say.

First of all about bump - it is a render time effect and as such it is per pixel one - no sub-pixeling here. As a result you would need at leas 2 pixels - one gets brighten another darken - that is your effect. These 2 pixels translates into the line that is approximately 40 cm thick in SC4 scale!I think that it is absolutely unacceptable. I have to see some proof  of bump working weel in SC4 for me to change my mind about that. Besides, don't you really think I didn't think of that? Bumping the seams was my first idea - result and investigating the reasons behind it led me to do it differently. That "roughness" of the bump happens no matter how fine that lines on your "texture" you use for bump - that is just how it works.

To get better defined lines you need to go for higher antialiasing settings. Example you've shown is a bit irrelevant, as the definition of those lines is supported by the different shades of the adjusting panels. Do it on flat colored surface and you'll see the result. Btw, what was upper sampling there 64? On a small structure it is fine, but do it on one of the monsters Bixel is dishing out and you'll say "good by" for your computer for a weekend.

Giving each line 1 pixel... The main thing here is to understand resolution of your output. There is fine line of getting elements finer (by increasing the size of your textures) and wasting the time by getting the so fine that they will be scaled out of existence during render. Plus getting your antialising up and up will prove extremely costly in terms of render time - getting upper limit from 16 samples to 64 - increases the render time 2.5 times. from 64 to 128 - 4 times again (on top of previous 2,5) so as a result going from 16 to 128 result is in almost 10 times longer export!Just to make it clear - on the texture I've spoke earlier one with size of 2048x2048 each like is 1 pixel thick - minimum possible. and it is on the verge of what MR can resolve when it need to stuff it on the structure that is just 803 pixels in the output window. You do the math! Getting texture bigger still with lines remaining at 1 pixel will result in incomplete lines.

As for texture size limits.. well the only limiting factor is a memory footprint. My system is entirely 64 bit so, theoretically ,I have NO limit to that. To be precise there is a limit but it is measured in hundreds of terabytes. But that's just theoretical and I'm not sure about the entire chain of software and algorithms involved.

I like you paneling thing, but you also have to understand that there are different tools and trick for different solutions and looks. The one I'm going for is absolutely uniformed - it is factory made aluminum paneling -all the panels are absolutely identical, and making them different would be plain wrong for the look I'm going for. I don't take ready bitmap textures - I generate them procedurally - so they could be virtually any size, or create them myself by assembling dozens of source images and effects.

Power of 2 is quite an important thing for internal workings of MAX, and becomes ever more so as size of textures is going up, or so I've been told... Square size is due to the UVW space being 0;1, 0;1 and optionally 0;1.

Not sure where did that resolution in Photoshop thing come from, I don't think I mentioned anything like that , I meant the resolution of output, but not in Photoshop, the one in MAX, and that is of PARAMOUNT importance, as it is you limiting factor and understanding it is key to make things look good and not waste you time chasing clouds. As I've said that texture that is effectively applied to the output of 803 pixels is itself 2025 pixels tall. Each "seam" line is 1 pixel wide on that 2025 pixel map, it gets squeezed to 803 pixels so resulting lines go into sub pixel size. On current LCD monitors you can effectively go town to 1/3 of a pixel below that no amount of trickery will help - again it just how things work on the engineering side of the things.

So, the trick is to get your texture resolution just right (ratio of map pixel size vs the output size in pixels).

Anyway the world of texturing is wast and interesting and I'm just starting to get into it. For a looooong time I was sort of avoiding it, but spending last weekend doing and redoing UVW unwraping got me hooked on it! ;-)

PS

just to summarize that long message. The optimal size of your bitmap texture should be between 2 to 3 times the size of it in the output: and that if your prepared for high antialising and understand how it works, Going beyond that will result in inevitable loss of detail!

PS2

sorry for all the typos, I was quite so tired when I've written that. Also sorry it that was too pushy..

[IDS2 3,368]

You are an incredibly talented BATter. All of your BATs look like they were taken right out of a picture. This is the best residential BAT I have seen (possibly ever) and I like the red the best, but all the colors are nice. Any chance of releasing them in a pack?

Hope to see you release this as these types of BATs are sorely lacking from the game.

Keep up the good work!

[gt6282 3]

Simfox: That's real nice! I've been reading your posts/arguments/whatever both here and at SC4D.. I'm learning a thing or two from you guys! Thanks!

[SimFox 802]

gt6282

We all stand on the shoulders of men who came before us!

So, climb up!!!

[mightygoose 92]

thanks for the informative response.

[kd5rax 82]

The only thing I've ever gotten the bump to work excellently was the base of the second version of Freedom tower (aka World Trade Center tower 1 as its now usually called).  It mimicked the random rotation of the steel plates.  Each plate had its own gradient field (the gradients where randomly generated and oriented to be rotated along only the axis perpendicular to the ground plane with an offset from the building side of +-7 degrees), and the gradient fields were then stacked in a pattern.  Not only did this method yield (at least in ingame renders but definately not standard renders) better looking results than a bunch of randomly rotated steel plates, but it reduced render time and poly count (which for me WAS a big deal back when I had the old, slow 32 bit laptop, if I over a certain number of polys, itd slow so much it would basically crash).  I say all of that to say this.... Bump mapping does have a place in sc4, but in this case after thinking about it I think you are right, bumping the edges of a tile in a low res setting like sc4 is not the most effective way to acheive the errr, effect.  For an example of how the tiles looked with the bump map, just look at the freedom tower thread.  It especially handled reflection better than many individual tiles.

[SimFox 802]

KD:

Well I'm not saying that Bump should be totally excluded from the consideration, I just say that given the way it is generated it has some limitation in terms of size of detailing it could be successfully used on.

BTW there is very interesting point in your message. You say that gradients were automatically and randomly generated... could you elaborate a bit on this. How was it accomplished?

[kd5rax 82]

Well, it was not technically "automatic" per se.... The way I got there was this.... I made a wall of individual steel plates.  Then using the random rotation script in the bat4max, rotated them randomly on the z axis by +- 7 degrees.  Then I selected them and applied a single uvw map to them all.  In the setting of the uvw map, I set it as a plane, rotated it to where it was defined by only the yz plane, then set its width to cover from the very ends of the farthest outside plate edges.  Then simply applied a gradient map (with a filter) to it.  Now the plate colors was from black to white depending on its y position.  Render a high resolution version of it and apply it to a wall of the same width and height as the original steel panel wal, and you have an instant over 1000 poly wall with only 2 polygons.  The main use of the technique could be used on building facades to give them slight rotational difference in the plates.  Or an ultramodern facade with intentionally rotated plates.  Although it does result in some quality loss, in the low res version of the simworld, it makes very little difference quality wise, and for me it yeilded significant performance gains.

[Simfan34 11]

Could make a hotel Ukraine Sans-spire?

Otherwise, this is just AMAZING.