Hi all I'm just wondering what way everyone makes tracks I've only just started modding a track using loft method But i read a old post yesterday (can't find the post was not on this forum) Saying about modelling the isi way? So what method do u use and why Like I said I've started a loft method track seems like a good way to make a track I've got my basic track layout what was pretty painless.
Well, there seems to be a few techniques that are commonly used: Lofting seems to be the most popular one. It's a clean method, but some may feel it doesn't give them enough control over the mesh early on in the process. The Extrude-Push method gives much finer control from the beginning, but it also means it's easy to screw up if you're not 100% confident of what you're doing. Then there's the Path Deform method. I have never tried this method, but I assume it's similar to extruding and pushing a spline in terms of control and complexity.
Funny, I'd have said the opposite about lofting and extrude-push. I feel lofting gives perfect control over placement, to the point where it's too perfect. Corners will be perfectly round with perfect radii and "messing" them up a bit is hard to do on the spline/shape level. It's incredibly quick (well, on the track scale of things at least) to get the very basics of a track done using lofts. With extrude-push I feel it's hard to get corners right, and satellite images with distortion only exacerbate that issue. It's far easier to give corners a more natural edge and slight undulations though. In my experience it also takes a fair bit longer, and as you said Luc, if you don't know what you're doing it's easy to mess up. For me the accuracy of corners is a big thing and I prefer lofting because of it. Some extrude-push tracks really irk me with corners that should be round (or at least rounder) but aren't. It changes the apex, it changes the use of curbs, it makes driving a smooth line harder when my brain thinks it's a round corner but my eyes have to tell it to get it straight at the last second. Lofting goes a bit towards the other extreme though, being too perfect and unrealistic in that. Path Deform is more similar to lofting I believe. You get to create the piece "straight" and turn it into a turn or esses or whatnot through deforming it along a spline. I guess you could could call it lofting not with a shape but with a pre-built mesh. That's what you meant by the path deform method, right?
Yes, that's what I meant with Path Deform. The difference is that it requires more manual work than lofting to get the exact results you're looking for; similar when using extrude-push. The more time you spend on it, the better the result should be. That's what I didn't like about lofting: you have to spend time to make it less perfect. I feel it's much more productive to spend the same time tweaking a mesh with FFDs. If you work with great care and attention, it's not that hard at all to get a smooth surface using the extrude-push method. It just takes time . When lofting, you also have to spend extra time adding the imperfections and bumps. That's the danger with lofted tracks: people sometimes skip that step. It always takes time. Always. Anyway, it's perfectly possible to get the same results using either method. I mean, they're all spline based. If the spline isn't great to begin with, the end result won't be great either. Lofting just does a better job of hiding the shortcuts people sometimes take .
And about Spline and surface modifier? Create two splines of roadsides and apply surface. and can create sections splines to give the slope you want. have an initial work in constructing splines but the control is total. what is your opinion? Edit: Can improves accuracy. I can build paths in Google Earth (without zoom limitation ) and import KMLs files (with my script) it only remains to optimize the spline.
Do you have a step by step example Mario? I'm thinking it would double the work compared to lofting, having to lay down two good base splines instead of one. I'd also imagine lining up the outside spline with the inside spline could be difficult. I'm not saying it's a bad way, just what hurdles I would probably run into if I tried. Did you do Laguna Seca that way?
I use splines ;-) I don't know is it faster/slower method but I prefer this one. http://isiforums.net/f/showthread.php/5381-Interlagos-WIP?p=63896&viewfull=1#post63896
I inspired myself in feels3 Interlagos and read some tutorials. The problem of splines is how to get a good accuracy but in Laguna i get it whenever i want. And with splines you get maths precision. For example if you have a cad file with technical data how to you will use in a mesh? video example
With shapes.. I prefer to use standard loft but without subdivisions. Infact I put my vertices for subdivision in shapes (eg; if I need to do a 12mt wide road I use 8 vertices with a 1.5 regular distance) , so when I've to model cambers I've the total control on camber to camber transitions, working with several different shapes. Usually I use 3 shape for each corner (if the corner is standard); one for the entry, one for the apex and another for the exit. Each shape is a variation of the camber design. This way I can use real data just entering values into my shapes vertices. If you work correctly with shape to shape transition, without messing up your loft, the result is pretty good. Same for bumps, when they're present. Of course if you use the loft subdivision, then you get just a planar/linear mesh and the control is on the mesh side with much less precision.
I think if you're just starting out, don't worry so much about technique. Technique is for veterans to discuss. Just worry about results. I think with any creative discipline you should (eventually) be familiar with multiple techniques and know where and when to use each one. If you're creating an oval circuit, you would probably use a totally different technique than if you're creating a rough, bumpy, country road or off-road course, and yet a different technique when creating a city street circuit. I think lofting is a great way to start--it's very similar to how BTB creates tracks, so it's pretty easy to pick up and get going. Eventually, though, no matter the technique, you'll probably break the track surface down a bit and start tweaking verts by hand to give it that extra bit of detail. Again, focus on the results.
This thread give me a idea. Just pick a spline for center of track and the script create all splines to create the splines mesh. need to apply materialID soon will be ready..
You don't need a script to do that Select spline -> outline (with selected "center") -> cross section -> surface modifier
the script is for beginners. And i do it in two clicks!! hey feels, the segments of splines have matID:2 but when collapse the editable poly have the default matID:1. any tip?
As far as I know, mat ID always resets after converting to editable poly. ps. my method needs only two clicks more
Hey all Yeh this is turning into a good bit of info in here I can see me starting mine again soon seeing the different ways of doing the track I've not touched max for 2 years or so, so it does take me a while to remember anything used to do a fair bit on bf1942 and bf2 Another quick question don't think it worth another thread is Am I allowed to use isi (joesville) texture files. I do hope to release the track (prob around 2016 lol) Or should I think about starting to make my own, and that would be a load more questions lol Cheers all
