New Upspring version (1.2)

maestro · Post by **maestro** » 16 Nov 2005, 02:12

Hi Zaphod, I read something strange here

http://www.okino.com/conv/exp_wave.htm
'No hierarchy information is output since the .OBJ file format has no methods to describing hierarchy; each sub-object of a hierarchy will nonetheless be exported as a unique group whose name's match the original object names in the internal database hierarchy. '

is this true ? if so how do i can uvmap a .obj kbot unit (which consists of alota hierarchy?) and upspring only support one texture per one unit ?

Gnomre · Post by **Gnomre** » 16 Nov 2005, 03:10

Just UV map the entire unit in your editor of choice so no pieces overlap (unless you want them to, of course), then export each piece. The pieces don't all need to exist in the same file for the UV space data to be preserved...

Post by **jcnossen** » 17 Nov 2005, 01:21

New version: 0.9

- fixes texture name writing for S3O format.
- fixes the OBJ problem maestro was having
- uses standard windows file open/save dialogs
- polygon flip tool
- texture groups can now be saved seperately

Thanks to weaver and maestro for buttons and an icon, and for all your patience with betatesting this app.

Gnomre · Post by **Gnomre** » 17 Nov 2005, 02:03

I can't get it to save the list of texture archives. I add them all then hit OK, then it brings the Upspring folder to focus for an instant, then goes back to upspring. Pasting the cfg file from the previous version fixed it, but.. yeah.

Post by **jcnossen** » 17 Nov 2005, 02:09

Ok fixed now, version 0.9b2:

http://www.fileuniverse.com/?p=showitem&ID=1806

FLOZi · Post by **FLOZi** » 17 Nov 2005, 02:41

yay, s3o saving now works!

Weaver · Post by **Weaver** » 17 Nov 2005, 13:25

Yeah !

My tips, save textures in png set transparency to 1 NOT 0 or your model will be black. Don't forget to cull faces.

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 17 Nov 2005, 13:40

That's the sexiest rotten orange I have ever seen.

Weaver · Post by **Weaver** » 17 Nov 2005, 13:48

SwiftSpear wrote:That's the sexiest rotten orange I have ever seen.

It was supposed to be a martian rock! Serves me right for talking about oranges. All I need now is to figure out how to make it work as a feature rather than replacing the metal storage model.

aGorm · Post by **aGorm** » 17 Nov 2005, 14:45

WAYAYAYAYYA!!! OK, look out soon for some realy sexy screens of my new map...

Zaphod, you rule!!

Any heads up on when you think teh fixed release will be for spring?

aGorm

Post by **jcnossen** » 17 Nov 2005, 18:19

It was supposed to be a martian rock! Serves me right for talking about oranges. All I need now is to figure out how to make it work as a feature rather than replacing the metal storage model.

A problem with putting object=model.s3o in the feature tdf, is that it doesn't read the file from objects3d\ when you have specified an extension. I think you can simply put: object=objects3d\model.s3o to fix this. This will be fixed in the next spring release (And I'm not sure when this is)

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 18 Nov 2005, 00:24

Weaver wrote:
SwiftSpear wrote:That's the sexiest rotten orange I have ever seen.
It was supposed to be a martian rock! Serves me right for talking about oranges. All I need now is to figure out how to make it work as a feature rather than replacing the metal storage model.

A martian rock would be more rough and less polished looking... It doesn't look like a bad rock, but it would fit more into a map like flooded desert then it would a martian map. It looks really water rounded.

Weaver · Post by **Weaver** » 18 Nov 2005, 01:16

SwiftSpear wrote:
Weaver wrote:
SwiftSpear wrote:That's the sexiest rotten orange I have ever seen.
It was supposed to be a martian rock! Serves me right for talking about oranges. All I need now is to figure out how to make it work as a feature rather than replacing the metal storage model.
A martian rock would be more rough and less polished looking... It doesn't look like a bad rock, but it would fit more into a map like flooded desert then it would a martian map. It looks really water rounded.

Yes, I'll make the final ones rougher.

What to do with these?

Gnomre · Post by **Gnomre** » 18 Nov 2005, 01:28

SwiftSpear wrote:
Weaver wrote:
SwiftSpear wrote:That's the sexiest rotten orange I have ever seen.
It was supposed to be a martian rock! Serves me right for talking about oranges. All I need now is to figure out how to make it work as a feature rather than replacing the metal storage model.
A martian rock would be more rough and less polished looking... It doesn't look like a bad rock, but it would fit more into a map like flooded desert then it would a martian map. It looks really water rounded.

I do still need rocks for my GoW port

Zoombie · Post by **Zoombie** » 18 Nov 2005, 01:54

Kenex rule!

[K.B.] Napalm Cobra · Post by **[K.B.] Napalm Cobra** » 18 Nov 2005, 06:16

Its spelt k'nex you fool, but yes, they do.

maestro · Post by **maestro** » 18 Nov 2005, 09:59

Hi, any succeed with non 3D MAX software ?
I got problem with Lightwave internal UV system, and i need reliable UV mapping software

aGorm · Post by **aGorm** » 18 Nov 2005, 10:16

Hi, anyone had any luck with texturing features? All mine come out black, although, I have found that it applies teh second texture perfectyly fine as when i swaped the texturs (incase the black reflekance one was the black one...) I ended up with a rather neat reflection from a mirror of bark...

I've tryed the Png thing, i've used bmp's, dss files (dxt5 and 3 on teh respective ones, i looked in teh source to find which one needed what) and frankly im stumped. or is this an engin problem??

aGorm

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 18 Nov 2005, 11:09

aGorm wrote:Hi, anyone had any luck with texturing features? All mine come out black, although, I have found that it applies teh second texture perfectyly fine as when i swaped the texturs (incase the black reflekance one was the black one...) I ended up with a rather neat reflection from a mirror of bark...

I've tryed the Png thing, i've used bmp's, dss files (dxt5 and 3 on teh respective ones, i looked in teh source to find which one needed what) and frankly im stumped. or is this an engin problem??

aGorm

This problem was in another thread. Both your textures must be PNGs I belive, and you need to set transparentcy to 1 rather then 0.

Weaver · Post by **Weaver** » 18 Nov 2005, 12:09

SwiftSpear wrote:
aGorm wrote:Hi, anyone had any luck with texturing features? All mine come out black, although, I have found that it applies teh second texture perfectyly fine as when i swaped the texturs (incase the black reflekance one was the black one...) I ended up with a rather neat reflection from a mirror of bark...

I've tryed the Png thing, i've used bmp's, dss files (dxt5 and 3 on teh respective ones, i looked in teh source to find which one needed what) and frankly im stumped. or is this an engin problem??

aGorm
This problem was in another thread. Both your textures must be PNGs I belive, and you need to set transparentcy to 1 rather then 0.

I don't know if they HAVE to be png, but you do need a format/converter that supports that level of transparency properly. As somethting with the correct level of transparency with be almost invisible in PSP and maybe the same in other paint programs.

It might make more sense to invert the transparency as this method is counter intuitive OR fix the engine so 0 transparency or no alpha channel will work. We have all spent days tearing our hair to find this out.

Spring RTS Engine

New Upspring version (1.2)