marc

Yeah, I suppose I will reinstall 3dsmax directly to C:\. As for "deltree.exe," I am hesitating using the one provided with the zip as I don't want to risk wiping out my hard drive by accident. Will BAT4Max work fine without it? (I don't mind manually emptying the temp folder after each export.) In the gmax BAT, the renderer during the export process makes only one pass down the image in each view, making it very slow on large buildings. (That is, the renderer only passes one black line down the image as it renders it- sorry, I can't really describe this better.) Are there multiple passes the renderer makes in BAT4Max when it is exporting? For example, the newest version of Cinema4D makes multiple passes down a rendering at the same time, greatly reducing the time it takes to finish, especially if you're using radiosity. Does 3dsmax/BAT4Max do the same?

How about rewriting the script to take into account varying installation locations for 3dsmax on different people's computers? From what I've read in the thread, 3dsmax should be installed in a hard drive's root directory (i.e.- C:\3dsmax) for the BAT script to work properly. I wish I had known this earlier- I just got 3dsmax 9 and installed it to the default "Program Files" directory that Autodesk sets up and I read the installation recommendations mentioned in the 3dsmax thread afterwards much to my chagrin. Packaging everything up into an .exe installer in which you can select the directories for the necessary folders would also be helpful. And while I'm offering suggestions, I also have a question. I know this isn't a BAT4Max support thread, but what exactly is "deltree.exe" needed for? Apparently it cleans up the files BAT4Max generates in the gamepacks\BAT\temp folder during the export process. But Windows XP no longer comes with "deltree.exe" and the FAT32 version that is provided with the BAT4Max zip archive doesn't work for those of us with NTFS filing systems. So is "deltree.exe" necessary for the proper working of BAT4Max or can I always delete the excess files in the temp folder generated during an export manually?

Just curious- about how long does it take to render that scene in 3dsmax? How much system and graphics memory does your computer have? (I'm thinking of upgrading from 1 to 2gb of memory to speed up rendering time in rhino and cinema4d, but I don't know if there would be a marked improvement.)

As you're laying out your portfolio in InDesign/Illustrator/etc, remember to limit your use of graphics other than the content you're presenting. If there's anything reviewers/architects hate, it's glitzy graphics surrounding the presentation material, since they take attention away from your work. Simple sans-serif fonts for titles/descriptions and maybe a black line/bar or two separating text from images should be enough for your portfolio layout. Ghosted background images, fancy fonts and graphics, too many colors, etc are big no-nos. I didn't consider all of this when I had to submit my portfolio for architecture, but I made it somehow. (I'm a second-year student now.)

Originally posted by: Jasoncw In the fall I'll hopefully be starting architecture school, which will be time intensive. quote> You should get some sleep now while you can... I guarantee you won't be seeing much of it next year!

Amazing work, Spa! The detail on the garage doors and the first floor in particular is exceptional. I don't know if you've noticed this (or maybe it's just my screwy eyes), but there's an interesting optical illusion on the "nodes" where the white mullions/columns intersect each other- a gray square appears at each intersection when you casually glance over the facade but disappears when you concentrate on any particular node! Just one suggestion (I apologize if you're already considering this): Consider varying the dark blue window texture a bit by making a few of the windows lighter/darker than neighboring ones, giving the illusion of different lighting in the rooms behind. (Like you can see in the photo at the top of this page.) Keep up the great work!

Hi Spa, (Nofunk, I hope you don't mind if I answer in your thread! ) Regarding the minimal difference visible- I think that's partly because the render is on a black backdrop, making both signs look the same. To me, the difference is much more noticeable once exported and visible in game, but right now I don't have the time to do an export and take screenshots in the game to compare. Like Jason mentioned in his post below yours, I once just tried making signs/details thinner before rendering, which was only satisfactory to me if the sign or whatever was placed against a dark backdrop. Chances are that it won't be in such a desirable situation, and that even thin signs will look blocky and hard to read ingame. (Check out the signs on any Walmarts, Kmarts, or other shops from the STEX for examples of this distortion.) Maybe this diagram might clarify it: Now we can all agree that signs and other detailing that are left "as is" (that is, as simple, unmodified solids, like in example A) will look too blocky in game and will get that "bleached out" look that results in the detailing/lettering being hard to read. (This can already be seen in example A, and it would look even worse once rendered in gmax.) This effect is especially noticeable on many of the signs on stores on the STEX. Jason's suggestion of making the detailing/lettering thinner (example B) might work in some cases, but depending on whether the detailing is in the air (Like freestanding above a building's roof) or against a light backdrop, etc, the lettering will most likely still get the bleached effect making it still hard to read. Now you might be lucky enough to have the sign placed against a dark backdrop (example D), which means you're all set. (Or vice versa, a dark sign against a really light backdrop). Already the detailing is very clear. Chances are that you won't often have this ideal situation, though. What I've found that works is copying ("Cloning" in gmax) the desired lettering/detailing, stretching it slightly in all directions (I use the 1D_Scale or "Stretch" command in Rhino to do this; I'm not sure what the equivalent tool is in gmax since I don't use it for modeling.) and then moving it slightly behind the original (distance may vary depending on your preference and how much clarity you want to show) to serve as a dark, close-fitting backdrop for the original. (Or a light backdrop if the original is dark.) This can be seen in example C. Technically, you don't really even have to do any scaling. You could just copy the original item, move the copy immediately behind the original (so that they are adjacent; you can use object snaps to do this) and then just make it darker or lighter as needed to pronounce the object in front. I like to use a slight scaling so that the copy sticks out slightly farther on the sides than the original, allowing even better detail pronunciation. As for night maps, Jason's suggestion will work well, but if you use method C above to enhance your details, the need to split the original object into a face to be lit and a depth to remain unlit is eliminated, since the stretched/moved clone can be used to cover up the sides of the nightlit object in front. Once again, Nofunk, I'm really sorry for "hijacking" your thread! I can delete or move this post if you like.

I haven't visited your thread for a while now... and I regret it. So much has been accomplished! The McNamara Building, Water tower, and Donovan's all look great! Regarding the "chunky" white antenna on the water tower- How about using a slightly darker texture (or perhaps leave the middle of the texture white, but "singe" the edges) so that when you reapply it to the antenna it gives an optical illusion of appearing to be thinner than it actually is? I've noticed the "chunkiness" of objects that should appear thin and fine on a lot of BATs, including mine. A trick I've used to disguise the bulkiness of pipes and signs/lettering/advertising that look way too fat is to duplicate the object, scale up the clone ever so slightly and move it slightly behind the original to diffuse "fatness" (ie: get rid of the 10 lbs the gmax cameras added ): Now compare an object with an "optical illusion" ("1" below) to an unmodified one ("2" below) in the gmax render: At first glance, the difference between the two seems minimal at best, but if you glance quickly from the sign with the darker-textured clone behind it (1) to the unedited sign (2), you can then see that 2 is indeed bulkier and would look unnatural in SC4. That little difference is all that's needed to make details "pop." I've used this same method for the piping/tank details on some of my BATs with equally satisfying results (at least to me.) A lot of BATters had neglected this in the past which is why many of the signs on the otherwise superb big box retailers/stores/gas stations/etc on the STEX look washed out, bulky, and hard to read. Hope this helped!

Originally posted by: Jasoncw Clue #2 Cobo, the Wayne County Building, the Vinton Building, and the government. What these things have in common is your second clue.quote> Hmm, I'm not a Detroiter but I could guess. What does our government, the Vinton Building, Cobo Center, and Wayne County Bldg all have in common? Could it be that each one of these entities is abandoned, run-down, and useless? Anyways, could it be the Fisher building?

Even with the problems around the edges, the render of 751 came out great! I don't think you should re-render it either, but you should know that a tiny voice in the back of your head will keep on saying... Psst... It's almost perfect, one more render and it will be perfect. That's worth another render, isn't it? I shouldn't let laziness get in the way!