Complex Models

[Grantw]

Totally new to this.

Whats the best way to build a complex model?
I just started a railway trestle to add to a landscape that I'm working on.
It has many parts, ties, rails, supports etc.

I built it all in layers but when I went to texture it I found that I would have to give each and every part a seperate name to get the map to apply properly.

Is it better to build each part seperately?
Make a rail, then save and close.
New object, make a rail tie, save and close.
Etc...

Then bring all the parts together later to make a trestle?

I guess what I did was to make one big object with tons of pieces.

Is there a preferred way?

Cheers

[Penforhire]

Interesting question. I thought separate layers had two big purposes, separate animation (e.g. car door open/close) and to organize complex models for easy visibility.

In LW 8.5 I'm getting into the habit of giving surfaces different colors than "default" during the surface assignments. That way I can tell if I missed any surfaces at a glance. Also, I need to plan my surface names better because once you have 50+ surfaces in the surface editor it is very useful to have similar surfaces group together.

No idea (yet) if v9 has any improved handling, like being able to assign surfaces in Layout...

[Gui Lo]

Hi GrantW,
For complex objects I tend to make parts in a layer away from the main object. Add and give it a surface name(s) and then move it over to the main object(saving first). Soon adding and naming surfaces becomes a hassle free part of the proceedure. The main difficulty comes when names are not added and it shows up in the render.

Get into a good habit now of naming surfaces as the model is built and the hassle soon disappears.

Gui Lo

[Grantw]

Thanks for the replys.

I noticed that I may hae made a mistake when I went to surface my first items. The rails on top of the trestle.

I chose one and created an image map and projected it on. Looked great.
I then opened the next layer with the other rail and tried to map the same map on. The minute I did that it changed the position of the first one.

I then realized that I had to name the rails something like Rail_one and Rail_two and then assign them the image map.

BING!! What about the sixty rail ties that are under the rails!!!

Texturing is an area that will require lots of practice to develop good habits.

My rail gave me problems right away because of the slightly strange shape.
Tried a planar projection but ran into problems and realized that I would maybe be better off with a UV map..... : 0.

Big learning curve.

Thanks for the help.
You'll see me around a lot. Great resource!

[lilrayray77]

If you are trying laying a whole bunch of rails, it is actually quite simple, and without the use of layers. First create a spline that conforms to the shape of the terrain. Then in a new layer create a single rail. With the spline in the background layer, go to the multiply tab>duplicate>more>rail clone. Play around with these settings untill you have something you like.

[Grantw]

Thats the way I made the rails in the first place.
I guess for me it's the way you start to lay out a model.

Lightwave has multiple object layers, then multiple layers per object.

I am a heavy Photoshop user. I'm used to layers and building advanced composites in one document. You apply filters to each layer and it simply works.

When I lay out a model in lightwave, I start with one part, then move to the next layer and create another part then move it into place. My trestle model has about 30 layers all in one object. One layer has the sixty ties that I cloned in. (Texturing issues?)

I guess the idea as brought up earlier is to name each piece. That seems strange as with the ties I would have to name them Tie_1, Tie_2, Tie_3 and so on to the sixtieth tie. Then apply the map to each. What about models with 600 parts?

The other thing I found was once the object is mapped with a texture, within the whole environment you can't move the object without messing up the map. I guess the map is fixed in space like a projector.

So I guess this brings up UV maps or texture baking? I want the objects to keep the maps and be able to move them where I want them without breaking the map.

So.... my original question, is it better to build a series of objects seperately and save them in a folder, then open a new object called "Trestle" and then open each object and Build it with the pre-made and textured parts or... does it really matter. Is there a "best" way?

[THREEL]

So.... my original question, is it better to build a series of objects seperately and save them in a folder, then open a new object called "Trestle" and then open each object and Build it with the pre-made and textured parts or... does it really matter. Is there a "best" way?

Hey there Grant! How's it going?

Let's run this idea up the flagpole and see if anybody salutes.:D

First, question. Is the trestle and landscape 1:1 or any other specific scale? If so, this is what I would do. I would go to a set of RR tracks close by and get the measurements for 1 section of track (this includes the rail length and amount of RR ties included in this 1 section). Also, I would take digital photos of a rail (end, side top and bottom), and a tie (end, and side views) to use as image maps. Next, I would try to get info on the radius of curved tracks that are used on the RR. If there is more than 1 radius available, I would get as much info on them as I can. Then, I would build a model of 1 RR tie, a simple box (with or with out radiused edges) should do for this. Then just give each of the 6 different surfaces names (i.e. RR.Tie.Top, RR.Tie.End.Left, etc...) and texture these surfaces with the image maps you took of the RR tie. Once you get the first tie looking the way you want it, just clone the others into place spacing them the distance, 1:1 or scaled down, you measured.

If you did this in Layer 1, go to Layer 2, and put Layer 1 in the background. Now, make 1 rail the shape you want it to look, give all sides the surface names and texturing you want, put it into position (on one side) over the ties in the background, and then, mirror (shift+v) the rail to the other side. Once you have the rails where you want them, cut (x) them out of Layer 2 and paste (v) them into Layer 2. Save to the file name of your choice. Now, you have one Straight Track Section that you can clone over and over in Layout, and your surfacing should look good. The only time you would need to surface each and every RR tie separately is if you were going to do extreme close-ups of the ties.

You can make curved track sections this way too. Just take your straight track section, copy it to Layer 2, and get the Layer 2 copy curved to the radius that you want. Then, bring up Layer 1, put Layer 2 in the background, and do a Bkg to Morph. Save your morphed version as a curved track section. Now, when you bring this object into Layout set-up Morphmixer for it, morph it 100% , and you should have your curved track section with the surfacing in the right places. Make sure you change your Sub-division order for this object to something other than First, until the Geometry looks right. The surfacing may not look right on the curved section in Modeler, but it should look right when you morph it to curved in Layout.

Finally, onto the trestle itself. The same rules should apply here, too. The trestle should have sections that repeat. Therefore, you should be able to make one section of it, or maybe even a half of a section in Modeler, and texture those surfaces the way you want. Bring this half or whole section into Layout and clone it as many times as needed. Move the clones the proper distances to make them butt up to each other, end-to-end. If they are half sections, you should be able to rotate every other clone 180 degrees to get them to line up.

At this point, if you want to move more than one of these objects as a group, just create a null object at the pivot point of your choosing and parent everything you want in one group to that null object.

I know I'm a little long winded, but I hope this will be of some service to you.:thumbsup: Please, let me know if it is.:)

THREEL (AL)

[Grantw]

Thanks Threel!

That great! Ok....

It's not precisely 1:1. I thought about rough sizes and eyeballed most of it.
I'll post a pic of the trestle tomorrow.

So.... I gather from what your saying (thanks again) that you can create a single object in modeler, name each surface and image map a texture onto it. This single will look great. (I did that after writing the initial post.) Then clone it and it will retain the texture and placement of that texture on each surface with multiple copies....correct? I did take the tie model with surfacing into Layout and copied it several times and it DOES take all the surfacing with it. I didn't think you created objects in Layout. (thats part of the confusion).

What I did was create a part and not name any surfaces and clone it sixty times. It seems like thats not the way to do it.

I guess where I get muddled is in the gallery's that I look at where someone builds an amazing model and it looks like there has been no surfacing. Then they go in and surface each piece like painting it.

With a model thats got many of the same part, you would create one, surface it perfectly THEN copy it multiple times in modeler. Then send it to layout.....yes? Or more accurately as your saying, make a section, then send that over to Layout.

Again Threel (and everyone else) thanks.
Lightwave is an amazing program and I really want to learn it but it definitely seems like there's a path to being efficient. It not well addressed in the manuals or books that I've read. The models that I've tried have a couple of the same parts but not 10's or 100's of the same piece. I'm sure in a year I'll smile at the questions that I've raised but to someone new it's very thick with tools and techniques.

Thanks!

[THREEL]

Afternoon Grant,

For something like what you're doing, I think this is a great way to do it. The surfacing on the clones should match if you space them the same distance apart which you'll do when you clone them. Your not really creating objects, per say, in Layout. It's more like using a copy machine when you clone your objects in Layout. The cool thing about that is, if you want to take a piece of your trestle and do something like blow it up for a war scene, you can highlight that particular clone save it as a new object with a new name directly in Layout. Then, you can take that new model into Modeler and manipulate it without changing the original. Also, you should be able to manipulate (i.e. HardFX) that clone directly in Layout without changing the original.

Like I started out, I think sections are the way to go for RR tracks. Look at the math. Let's say you have a section of track that has 1000 RR ties if you do each tie individually, you'll have 1000 clones for the RR ties alone, and then you'll have to firgure out the length the track will have to be over thos 1000 ties. And that's if the track is entirely straight. What happens if you want to put curved track in there? If you do it the way I'm suggesting you just make a section of track with 10, 20, 25, 50, or 100 ties to a section, and overhang the rails so you can butt those together so that they look seamless. Once you get your sections built, then you can clone them instead. You can do the same thing with curved track and your trestle too. You just need to do some math to figure out how big you want the radii of your curved track to be. Have you ever seen any put a model RR layout together? Your basically doing it the same way I'm suggesting. They have entire sections of straight and curved track that they lay end-to-end.

Unless you're an exceptional artist that you can make great looking wood and other surfacing in photoshop, your best bet is to actually get digital images that you can surface your objects with.

I like LW alot too, but I've still got a ways to go before I'll consider myself an expert in LW, but I do know that's why they have cloning in both Modeler and Layout. Most of us will never fully realize the maximum potential LW has.

I'm really looking forward to see a rendering of your trestle.:D

THREEL (AL)

[Grantw]

Here's a quick render of the tie with image maps.
I surfaced it in Modeler adn tried cloning it but the map doesn't stay put on the clones in modeler.

It works in Layout no problem.

[Penforhire]

That is an awesome tie texture! You can also rotate and spin the cloned ties so the textures don't obviously repeat from tie-to-tie.

[Grantw]

Thanks!

Here is a rail texture I did a well. It's done with an Atlas UV. I'm getting some stretching which I have to figure out and then add the reflection map to the top of the rail where the train wheels ride.

Any ideas how to fix the stretching?

[THREEL]

Here's a quick render of the tie with image maps.
I surfaced it in Modeler adn tried cloning it but the map doesn't stay put on the clones in modeler.

It works in Layout no problem.

Evening Grant,

That is a way cool RR Tie. Where did you get the images for surfacing? Very authentic looking. Are they digital photos? As far as the surfacing not lining up in Modeler when you clone the tie, are you spacing your clones in multiples of the width of the tie? In-other-words, if your RR Tie is 1' wide, then your clones should be spaced exactly on multiples of 1'. Although, I just tried it with a 1' wide tie and the surfacing lined up when I cloned them at even foot increments (2', 4', 6'). When I cloned the original at odd increments (i.e. 3', 5', 7') the surfacing on every other tie lined up. I tried all that in Modeler. If your ties are more or less than 1' wide you'll have to figure out the correct amount to space these, but I have a feeling to get the surfacing to line up you'll have to space the ties at even increments when you clone them in Modeler. For example if your original tie is 10" wide you'll have to space the clones 20", 40" or 60" apart to get the surfacing to line up. If your original tie is 8" wide then your clones in Modeler will have to be 32" (8" x 4), 48" (8" x 6), 64" (8" x 8) apart, and so on.

Like Penforhire pointed out, if you don't want every single RR tie to look identical, maybe you could make 5 or 10 ties with individual surfacing, space them the right amount apart, and clone these ties 2 or more times to make an entire track section out of these.

As far as the strecthing on the Rial Texture goes, how big are the images you are using for the texturing. If the rail is longer and or wider than the image you'll have to figure out the ratio between the rail size and the image length so you can adjust the scale accordingly.

It looks like you're down to the math part of things at this point. Like life, LW is very strongly math oriented.

Keep on Choo-Chooing on:D , and keep us posted.

THREEL (AL)

[Grantw]

Thanks for the comments. The texture is from a digital back.
I like image map modeling the best for sure.

I guess I'm running up against the limits of projection maps. I was thinking that when you selected a surface and named it, and then applied a texture to it, that that texture would stay with it.

Rotate the object 12 degrees and the software would rotate the map 12 degrees. Raise it in the Y axis 5m and LW would raise the map 5m.

Similar to linking layers in PS.
I gather I'm now in the UV arena with that thought.
I thought you could achieve the same thing with Projection maps.

The more I read, the more I come to the understanding that many modelers master UV maps and texture mainly with that method.

It worked well with the rail because of the curves and different planes.
I just have to tweek my map.

UV's are funny in that when I unwrap the model I get both the inside polys as well as the outer poly's. So.... two groups of the same map.
I guess thats because of the way I made it. Used a profile of a rail, used bezier curves to create the shape and then extruded it along a path.

It's a hollow rail so I guess two surfaces.

Do UV maps ignore normals?

There also odd in that they have to fit in the UV box and a rail is way longer than that box, so the maps for a rail that is 20' long is about a half an inch by quarter of an inch!!. I think I did it right when I took my long texture in PS and when placing it with the exported map in PS, I free transformed the length to fit the mini map. It stretched though so Threel, I guess I'll have to do what you suggest and adjust the original map size.

Or... just thinking to myself, I should bring in the original texture full size and stretch the UV's to fit. Make sense or am I out to lunch.

Ok... time to go to bed.
Cheers
Grant

[THREEL]

I guess I'm running up against the limits of projection maps. I was thinking that when you selected a surface and named it, and then applied a texture to it, that that texture would stay with it.

Rotate the object 12 degrees and the software would rotate the map 12 degrees. Raise it in the Y axis 5m and LW would raise the map 5m.

Morning Grant,

You lost me at digital back. I guess I'm not as up-to-date on computer jargon as I should be. As far as Projection Maps in LW goes, I look at them like this: The image that you are mapping on the surface is a movie projector, and the surface you're mapping to is a movie screen. Therefore, when you move the projector or screen without moving the other the same distance, your projector no longer aligns with the screen. The funny thing is, to get the surfacing on the clones to line-up, you have to space them at even increments from the first one. Anotherwords, if an object is let's say 1' wide you need to space your clones at a multiple of 2 from the original to get the surfacing to line-up on the clones.

There is something in LW called SurfaceBaker, but that is in Layout, and I haven't had much success with it. I'm sure I'm missing a step.

When we talk about UV mapping, I haven't had much experience with that either, but when I tried it on a model of hair (no sasquatch, just surfacing) that I did for a character, the UV map I created still didn't seem to flatten out for me.

Did you merge the points of your rail object after you extruded the rail profile. If I remember correctly, when you use Extrude on polygons, the extrusion is not connected to the original. I would have most likely used Extender Plus to get length out of the rail. All you have to do is select all of your points on the outer edge of your rail profile and run Extender Plus. At first it looks like nothing has happened, but if you run a move or other command on the still selected points, you'll see the newly created polygons, and they're all connected to the original (s). Also, make sure you don't have double-sided selected on the surfacing for your rail. I don't know if that would cause a problem with the UV map or not.

I know I have a lot to learn on the texturing of objects, but if your texture is 1' wide and your object is 20' wide, then if you do a scale-to-fit on your image it should get stretched by a factor of 20. If you keep your image at its true size, then the projection map of the image should repeat at every 1' increment from the original image. Unless you change it to mirror, or the other options. If your image is 20' wide, and your rail is 20' wide then you should be okay.

Keep us posted. THREEL, but you can call me AL.

[Penforhire]

If you do have polys facing inside closed volumes (e.g. the rail) you should be able to safely delete them. You might be able to Flip the entire object, select the old-inner-now-outer polys using a shaded view (not selecting the flipped ploys), delete, and flip again to restore the hidden polys.

[Grantw]

Thanks Al

I now understand about the way projection maps work.
Here's the issue I'm having and I guess it means that I'll have to make a custom map.

Lets say you have a 1 ft. sq. object (flat) like a picture hanging on a wall. You have a texture map that is the same dimension. From what you're saying I would have to space the "screens" 1 ft. apart or increments of 1 ft. to line up with the tiled (repeated) textures on an infinite plane in 3D space.

BUT... what if what you needed to do was have the pictures 8 inches apart?
Don't know if this is correct I'll try it out... make a map that has a texture with 4" borders then when they repeat, they will have have 8" of white space around them that you could screen over your object and thus, they would line up properly.

Off to the lab!

[THREEL]

Hey there Grant,

Actually, I did a little test with my own little RR ties that I built, the ends were 1' square, and when I spaced the clones at even intervals apart (2', or 4', or 6', or 8', or 10', etc...) the surfacing would line-up right on every tie. But..., if I spaced the clones at odd intervals (1', or 3', or 5' etc...) the surfacing on every other RR tie would line-up. That seems strange, because you think that if an image was the same measurement as the surface your applying it to, and cloned the objects in exact increments the surfacing would always line-up.

If your RR ties are 8" square, then your image of your tie should be 8" square too. I don't think you need a white border around it. Just space your ties according. Remember, I said at even increments. When you clone your first tie for the rest, make your off-set 8" x a multiple of 2 {i.e. 16" (8" x 2),
32" (8" x 4), etc...}. That should work.

Got to go. Talk to you later. AL

[Grantw]

Here is textured trestle in place for this use anyway.

[THREEL]

That's pretty darn cool looking there, Grant. Is most of the scenery made up of different objects as well? It all looks very realistic. Do you already have a train model to run down your tracks? I'm getting ready to do a video about a train, so I was looking at a RR track that runs parallel to a highway close to home, and I noticed the RR ties are about 3/4 buried in a stone base. If you have track running on solid ground, you might want to consider that as you lay track on "dry land".

Once again, extremely nice job on the trestle and scenery. I give it a BIG:thumbsup:! Don't forget to post your renders in the gallery forums.

THREEL (AL)

[Grantw]

Hey
The image is made up of several other images, and re-lit. I shot the images in flat light and added the light effects afterwards. I am going to be shooting a train model in position and putting a headlight beam and steam effects.

I still have quite a bit of work to do on detailing the scenery.

Thanks for the comments!

Grant

[THREEL]

Evening Grant,

Just keep us posted from time-to-time.

AL:)