Gone FSHin'

[CT14 2,486]

Glad to help.

I do get the sense that most things are covered, aside from the above-mentioned items. Some lots may benefit from finicky custom overrides on one-off tiles (on-lot road crossings being the most common case), but that seems well above and beyond the scope of the project as it stands.

Here's a question: this will use the customizable texture system, right? I'm actually rather happy with the default RRW appearance, but would also enjoy messing around with different looks.

[rivit 3,391]

Where the on-lot road crossings have been done with base Lot tiles they will probably have to be made that way, for those using a ground base and overlays the common set will probably do - but its not actually all that hard to make the tiles. The only painful things will be baked-in rail on buildings and props, but if its important enough eventually someone will do it - either by re-rendering a model  or taking advantage of a Lot or Model texture or editing them directly. 

The mod is set up to be able to make any combo of sleeper/ballast/grass/paving  and takes about 3/4 hour to run from scratch, which isn't bad considering how big it is. I have made a "sampler" which is a version of the mod which has just enough textures to people play around with colors. When we get a bit closer to launch, we will release this so people can experiment for themselves. You'll need to know how to use GoFSH to run a script and an image editor to make the sleeper and ballast tiles but we will do an explain for it. 

The main mod(s) will come out in say 4 varieties with an installer to start with as a drop-in like you've just done and as people come on board we will consider making more, and in the long run, for the hardy and adventurous release the sources so that you can completely roll yur own. 

For now though we are going to work on NAM36 to make sure it has everything in it. We know we have the textures,  Eggman has done quite a lo of exciting new stuff, and things like crossings and pathing that didn't work have been fixed. It will be a big NAM for Rail.

[CT14 2,486]

One more, the 4x9 Large NBVC Filling Station as pointed out by @ROmeoBOT:

There is a branch texture not lined up quite right.

[rivit 3,391]

Yeah, spotted that one in his/her post yesterday - is now fixed.

[ROmeoBOT 23]

We really appriciate the hard work you guys are putting into this.

Are these going to be part of NAM 36?

Tell me if I can help testing anything!

[rivit 3,391]

Sometimes you can get lucky. The Estacao da Luz by Frogface is one of those very old lots (2005) that has the rail baked into the model - but on investigation it also has been completely lotted with rail underneath the model. As an experiment I took all of the textures and where the rail was changed the Alpha (from white to black) to make that part transparent . The result is as below. Close observation as trains enter and leave will show that there are still bits of the LODs that are wrong but overall its pretty usable. Below the image a file for the patch - I have also fixed the exemplar for modern transit lot values. You will need the original for this to work. 

Estacao da Luz - RRW patch.dat

[rsc204 21,808]

Urrg... I do hate it when someone models something that should be textures into a model, it's so unnecessary.

Great work on fixing it though, I've done similar things a few times and the results can be quite hit and miss. This looks pretty decent though and it brings new life to a nice station model I wasn't previously aware of.

[CT14 2,486]

I found the missing texture pack for Paeng's MTP logging lots -

With this installed, I can see that Logging Freight Station from MTP Addon Pack has a DTR/custom dirt crossing which is not handled yet in the Reskin version I have been running.

[rivit 3,391]

Nice one @CT14 - I've fixed it straight away to make sure I don't forget it. Link is to up-to-date BSC lot Support - just put over the one you've got -it also has the filling station rail fix 

 

 

G2 BSC LotSupport.dat

[CT14 2,486]

That was fast!

Also the Estacao de Luz fix seems magic... I had no idea that could be done.

Here's the result of retesting Logging Freight Station with the new G2 BSC LotSupport.dat file.

I also found the Logging Road pieces to make a proper connection to the lot next to the rail crossing (here, an End piece).

 

 

Eight or nine lampposts though, that's a few too many lampposts.

 

[rivit 3,391]

@CT14 That logging lot sure looks good. I was quick because I just happened to see your post almost as you made it.  The editing trick works because a model is really only a small mesh (or meshes) with a texture hung over it, and SC4 uses transparency to delimit the edges of the texture. So sometimes, if its in the right place, you can fool SC4 into believing the edge is somewhere else by poking holes in the alpha map. The same trick can be used when making automata to save a lot of triangles. In this case they were at the extremities of the model so its not very disruptive, but if you look in night view you will see that the rail is now unlit as its no longer part of the model. Small price to pay for a more unified look though.  

[CT14 2,486]

The Foz Real Railyard pack v1 (by Fantozzi).

This lot bundles its own early version of RRW_Lottex. I really like the look of the ground textures for these sidings... gravel to dirt to weeds.

I'm not sure if this should be supported, since I just found out there is a V2 which was updated to use the SM2 released textures... I'll test that next.

 

And the link to the new version which should already be ok:

 

[rivit 3,391]

There are three Lot texture sets that are not at present configured in the RRW reskin . They are Lottex_FZ, Lottex_SW and Lottex_SM2.

These sets are non-consistent with normal RRW lot textures in a couple of ways - they are darker than the other lot textures (presumably by design but which can be compensated for) and they show compression artefacts after unFSHing. (which means the originals are needed to do a good job with them). 

The FZ set also is semi-transparent - that is the ballast is semi-transparent which is unusual for rail textures. Normally grass grows over/between ballast and not under it.  Aside[ A better technique might be to leave holes in the texture for grass to show through on a lot, or just color the ballast accordingly.] 

The SW set is a large collection of RRW textures re-IDed as LotTextures and in my view should probably be avoided (decommissioned) as the most common ones are in other sets, and these are unlikely to be (have been) used for a lot. Normally the Original NW texture is directly renumbered as a Lot Texture when needed, rather than an entire reissue with new IIds.

The SM2 set has been catered for with the Simmer2 transitions already in the Reskin as these are designed to be predominantly on Simmer2 lots, so will not be converted.

Jury is therefore out on the first 2 and I welcome views by stakeholders... 

[Fantozzi 4,067]

Sorry, missed this topic so far.

When I made the first version of the Real Freightyard there were no lot textures for RRW around. So I made some myself. Then @Simmer2 got into it and his textures are much more elaborated.

So I made a second version of the Real Freightyard. It's totally the same except of the rail textures changed to Simmer2.

Please update to this and don't make any further use of 'RRW_lottex_FZ.dat'. It must be considered as outdated as Simmer2 textures covers everything in a much better way.

I left the old version, V1 on STEX just because for the information that this set is outdated so everyone checking for an update and is able to read there can see a big fat link to Version 2 on this page.

But also I see that V1 was downloaded ~3500 times and V2 ~300 times - so there is still a big lag.

But please don't use RRW_lottex_FZ.dat anywhere. Please help to avoid redundance and confusion - as those old textures do nothing different than the ones by Simmer2. I guarantee this - there's nothing you can do with these old textures that can't be done with Simmer2's packs. Those textures were in need only for a short period and only for this outdated pack - but everything they covered now is covered by Simmer2's textures in a much more pleasent way - I swear. As I use them myself too and threw mine into the garbage can. I will refuse any support for those textures or permit any further development. Kill them, bury them. This is the only right way to go: Replace the old version with the new one. There is no difference in the content, only the rail textures are replaced.

To update - please bulldoze all instances in the game before and save. Replace old version with the new one.

 

[EDIT]

Also I made this textures with an old version of Corel Draw which put a lucency along the transparency borders - you can see it on the pictures. So there is a an evident quality reason not to use them.

 

[rsc204 21,808]

3 minutes ago, Fantozzi said:

I left the old version, V1 on STEX just because for the information that this set is outdated so everyone checking for an update and is able to read there can see a big fat link to Version 2 on this page.

You should be able to do that whilst locking the download so no one can continue to download the outdated pack. If you need help with this, just ask .

4 minutes ago, Fantozzi said:

But also I see that V1 was downloaded ~3500 times and V2 ~300 times - so there is still a big lag.

That's a reflection on how quiet things are I'd imagine too. Mods I could have got 400-500 downloads a month for a year or two back, might get that in 6 months today.

[rivit 3,391]

Thankyou very much Fantozzi for that info - One less set to have to think about making.

[Tyberius06 12,189]

Well, @Simmer2 also mentioned to me, that these early RRW lotting textures won't be supported with the Reskin mod. I just started to make a huge roundhouse lot (main buildings from Oppie Roundhouse and WMP Railyard) using RRW_Lottex_SW.dat, RRW_Lottex_SM2.dat, RRW_Lottex_SM2R2.dat and SM2_RRW_nsb_Tex.dat (it was confrim by him, this last one won't be affected at all, because it doesn't use any ballasts and sleepers), mainly because I don't really like the RRW version of NCD's textures, and with more or less using these texture packs I could make the track layout (railyard setup) for the Lot, as I wish.

So my question is, will we get full new sets of rail textures (base/overlays) which is compatible with the new MOD, and these old ones will be obsolate eventually, and or will we get connector textures between the Reskin textures and these old ones, so the rail yards could be more unique? I like the current design on these lots and I'm curious how they can look like beside the new skins, like on the picture above, where 2 tracks are connecting to the lot (only one can go through functionally), and a third one is a normal RRW track.

 

- Tyberius

 

P.S.: I do understand that's a huge project of yours, and I do appreciate what all of you're doing, amazing possibilities! Thank you very much!

 

[rivit 3,391]

Hi Tyberius, our real problem is that which occurs at the boundary of lots. So Simmer2 has made a number of tiles that are boundary tiles on his lots (and in Lottex_SM2, SM2R2) - these make a neat join from the Reskin texture to the original lot texture. What this means if you use those boundary tiles then your lot can theoretically use the SM2 textures without side effect.

The SW texture pack is the wildcard - since we have no idea how many of the 366 textures in that set have been used or might be.  Because they don't match other lot textures in colour I would prefer not to change them. They match with the SM2/SMR2 etc.

Attached below is the set of transition tiles Simmer2 has supplied - with this you can at least see if we have enough transitions - otherwise we can work with you to make some that might also be useful for others. Now these are obviously not the right colors but at least you can see if you've got one them. Just put this file to load last, they will override any you have used automatically and you can see them easily.

Other lot tile sets will match outside rail in the end, as you've probably seen in CT14s pics.

G5 Simmer2 LotSupport.dat

[Simmer2 23,786]

Rivit.

You mentioned that you could batch color correct some of my packs. If that is still possible then go ahead. I can provide you with the texture ranges I used for those packs if you need them. Furthermore, I can even lock the dl page until further notice. I had uploaded them on the LEX only.

Simmer2

[jaredh 195]

What you are doing here might actually convince me to try out the new Railway stuff.

[CT14 2,486]

User "nattemoris" on SC4D reported that Schwartz Chemical Company isn't covered - it may not have been tested yet.

https://www.sc4devotion.com/csxlex/lex_filedesc.php?lotGET=882

[rsc204 21,808]

I'm not sure the problem is related to the RRW overrides. If you check the comments, they've updated them to say it was fixed by installing a missing dependency. To my knowledge that one is covered by the RRW overrides in our files.

[CT14 2,486]

I might have misread it, it looks like they had to install the old pack to resolve it. I'll test it properly and report back.

[CT14 2,486]

I couldn't find a rail-served version of Schwartz Chemical Company in my plugins...

The Timber Lumber Company has a slight glitch at the upper siding, where the track goes from DTR to STR.

 

[redfox85 659]

So I'm attempting to color correct a RRW piece. I grab the piece in Reader, save as PNG, and then when I have gofsh adjust the color, all I get is black box. If I convert it to BMP it works fine. The adjust color does say it supports PNG . any idea why I cant get the PNG to work? 

[rivit 3,391]

Well redfox you may just have found a bug. I have almost always worked with BMPs because Windows isn't completely at home with PNGs so its distinctly possible this slipped through testing. GoFSH reads the PNG by using Windows code.

If you can send me a PM with the PNG attached I can find out if it's me (GoFSH) or the nature of that tile. If you use GoFSH to convert from PNG to BMP does that work correctly with this PNG? (I cant tell from your post if this is how you converted it)

[rivit 3,391]

Just to confirm - redfox85 did highlight a bug which I hadn't seen in testing.

The PNG texture he was using had transparency. Windows loaded this correctly, but saved it as an empty file after the color processing. Since I cannot change or bypass the underlying GDI+ code I cant remove the bug.

From a deep search on the web it looks like Windows .Net (GDI+) will not save the PNG correctly if it has transparency which this does. All examples of saving PNGs avoid the issue. PNGs that have no transparency are OK. Ironically BMPs are correctly made from transparent PNGs but not going the other way.

The GoFSH PNG<>BMP conversions always produce separate color and alphas for that reason.

So I would always use the bmp path to color correction.

Use GoFSH fsh<>dat to get the texture, unfsh it, color convert, enfsh it, (fsh<>dat) done

You wont need to change any ids except GroupID if you're going from network to lot texture.

[CorinaMarie 29,605]

Cool program!

Today I installed GoFSH, read the manual thoroughly up to page 27 (which includes the worked example 1), and then tried my hand at it. Here's what I was able to do:

[rivit 3,391]

Well it's been a while since I last went FSH'n but as usual the New Year holidays turned out to be a good time to play around with the program. Late in 2018 I did some development work with TWrecks to be able to convert BAT4Max MN to DN by essentially selecting the blues and darkening them. Here is probably the most difficult example we tackled.

There are quite a few problems caused by the non-linear nature of this color change but it seems to capture the global lighting fairly well.
 
However the grail has always been to be able to convert the Fixed Night that BAT4Max produces into the Variable Night that Maxis uses. This because all lighting conditions (eg. Sunrise/Sunset) are automatically handled for us by the game. At the basis of this is recognising that the Variable Night works because of the following formula R = Day.N(1-Alpha) + Lights*Alpha where R is the result in game, N is the colour of Night (which varies from day through night) and Lights are the Night Render and its Alpha.

If we have the Fixed Render R and the Day Image, and know the N value, then determining Alpha and Lights is what we need to solve, but we only have one equation for two unknowns... What we do know is that Alpha and Lights each vary between 0 and 1 (255), so since Alpha is in both terms of the equation let's guess the Lights, calculate the Alpha that gives the correct result R, then using the constraints recalculate the Lights in all three color channels R,G and B. Since this is a fixed algorithm no manual intervention is needed, other than for the automatic methods entering a blue threshold correponding to the Fixed Night Render method.

This allows us to calculate a set of lights and alphas (which are quite distinctive) given the Fixed Night and the Day Image and the appropriate Night value, which then plays correctly with the Variable Night ingame. However we can also solve this problem given only the Fixed Night Render by making some additional assumptions about Night Color Values.

Shown here one panel of Debenhams by Mattb325  extremes are the color of the lights not their alphas. What differs between these methods is how shadows in the day image will be treated in the variable night render. There may also be a color difference between the methods because in the Auto case we are guessing to some extent. However this method has proved to make a better job of separating lights in very dark (even darker than DN) night renders. At least we can choose the one we like best.

Now all of these options have been implemented in the latest GoFSH (3.5.1). As a bonus I also implemented a routine to turn the variable night into a fixed night to help me test - however this proved useful in another way.

~~~

One of the things that I find disappointing in SC4 is the restriction the game places on nightlighting Network Models - for example the FLUPs in the NAM cannot be lit like buildings are. Now in particular I miss this with Avenue FLUPs, so I went back to the original Marrast FLUPs (which are TE Lot Based) and wanted to use them in my game. I run a toned down nightlighting, with Sodium Orange on Avenues and Highways.

In this image we see what NAM Ave Flups look like unlit, and to the left what my attempt at T21s delivered (better but meh). The Marrast originals, though, have a Bright Mercury Lighting (green) so is there a way to change this so I can have them match my Avenues? Yes probably several - but here's how I did it.

First I made a Fixed Night rendering of the FLUP, then used the new Fixed Night conversion routine to create the new sort of Lights image which maximises the color components of the lighting. I then passed this through a color change action in Photoshop (greens to oranges) and used the resulting alphas in-game.
After this I added some color in the white regions and the light bulbs so as to look a bit like the rest of my Avenues. (see in-game flup image above). I now have FLUPS that reasonably match my Avenue Lighting.

~~~

Now along the way I wanted to review what effect these color and alpha changes were having on the whole model, in all views. Since the Avenue FLUPS are larger than 1 tile this would mean that I would have to assemble the model rendering by had - a tedious process. Similarly, when I was testing the Night conversions I also wanted to see the overall effects. So another new tool came to pass in GoFSH, a proofing tool which allows one to do this assembly using GoFSH, rather than say Photoshop and a lot of copy/pasting.

An interesting problem raises its head in trying to reconstruct a model rendering from its FSH. When the model is made, the rendering scripts only keep tiles that are not empty - so its impossible to determine with certainty how to automatically reassemble the model from tiles. There could be missing tiles at any edge. So I had to invent a simple iterative approach to getting the render correct. Once thats done, it will remember how to reconstruct that model.

An example showing the layout needed for "The Bow" by kellydale2003

~~~

So both of these new features are in GoFSH 3.5.1 BETA. I'm not happy that it's bulletproof enough yet, but if you'd like to be a test bunny you can find it in my OneDrive archive here. It installs to replace your current GoFSH - it should still work as it did for previous work. Please feedback bugs, findings or suggestions through a PM to me, but feel free to show here what you've done with it. I've already updated the manual and you should look through this to see how to use the new options. Once we've ironed out the bugs and workflows I'll release it here on Simtropolis formally.     

[rivit 3,391]

Well I know I said it couldn't be done but I've had a bit of a breakthrough in the quest for making new colorway versions of the Real Railway. The original Reskin Method we made in 2016 allowed us to change Sleeper and Ballast colors - now a way has been found to also change the Rails themselves with a small modification to the files we made before.

Here are some examples the authors of the Reskin have made so far - existing Eggman, RVT, MGB and VIP versions did not change the rails. Full MGB and RVT sets have been available for use some time. I've now been able to make emulations of a MAXIS and  original RUM colouring and also a RRW with shiny rails. These are snaphots from a working city with no terrain mods.

Sorry about the jpeg artefacts, but notice how the colours used have a dramatic effect on the "look and feel" of the result even making the geometry (which is a constant) look different. Also your own terrain mod will affect how the rail looks. Our eyes and brains are easily fooled into seeing what they want to see not necessarily what's in front of them.

Now if you would like to try out these new things you can if you have NAM 36 RRW installed. The Reskin Kit Sampler v2.0 can be found in my SC4 resources folder here. OneDrive SC4Resources.  Just put one of the TestSets somewhere that will load last (Plugins:\__LasttoLoad will usually do it) to see what it looks like in your city. Remove to get back RRW as it was.

It's even possible to make other variants yourself - who knows you may make a variant everyone wants. To do this you will need GoFSH 3.6.1 - also in the above archive.

This brings me neatly to the announcement that GoFSH 3.6.1 has just been released. It has quite a lot of new functionality (a big release) - in addition to this Rail Editing, it has new tools for proofing BAT textures, and also changing Dark Night renders to operate as if they were standard Maxis Night Renders amongst other things. Read the manual for the how-to and details. Enjoy!.