Stripes/decals on my track look like they're flying

Yeah that was the least worst way I could describe this



As you can see, it doesn't look like its... actually painted. It looks like the separate geometry it is. Now, I have them separated by 2cm in Maya, and I even set OnTop to ridiculous negative values in the TDF file and nothing has changed. Here's a strategically positioned screenshot in gJed to show what I mean



So I don't know what's going on. Maybe its my texture? My fresnel settings? I don't know.

Thanks in advance.

 

Hi,
you should be able to set it to 0.002-ish (2mm) above the road and then tag the mesh as 'decal' to prevent z-fighting/flickering.
You might not then need the OnTop values either

 

Hello,

The problem with that is that in maya there's a lot of Z-fighting when objects are that close. I think the main problem here is that OnTop doesn't seem to do anything. Even when set to crazy values like -0.2 nothing changes.

I can definitely just export at 2mm in maya, but it would make the project way more cumbersome to manage.

 

Find the "camera attributes"
Untick automatic near clip plane. And set the near clip plane to 0,5.


A decal distance of 0,01 offset works just fine. (smaller is better)

in gJED
Main diffuse texture needs to be a DTX5 dds with an alpha channel.
Blend mode in gJED is src alpha to invers source alpha.
Same as track edges.

 

Hello guys.


First of all thanks a lot for the help. I tried multiple times and couldn't get something nice. I even remade the polygon (selecting faces from the road mesh, duplicating them and then raising by 0.002) and it still looks off to me. At least I got close enough to the ground at one point that not even the Decal tag could save me from the Z-Fighting.

This is the best result I have so far. I honestly do not know what to think about this.



And a gJed shot



Does it look like its floating to you guys?

 

You're getting closer.

I guess you are using a T1xT2 bumb spec map.
- T1 = finish line texture (UV set 1)
- T2 = track asphalt multi (UV set 2)
- Bumb = track asphalt normal map (UV set 3)
- Spec = track asphalt specular map (UV set 3)

So make sure your UVset 2 and UVset 3 is matching with the roads UVset 2.

So if you duplicated the faces from the roadmesh:
- Delete UVset 4
- and copy UVset 2 on UVset 3

 

I'm using Specular map t1 mul t2, I've seen it being used in most S397 tracks. Is the lack of a bump map what is giving me the "floaty" look?

 

Your T1xT2 spec map is OK too.
But same thing regarding the UVsets "asphalt multi map" and "asphalt spec map" need to match with the roads asphalt.
- Delete UVset 4
- and copy UVset 2 on UVset 3

 

Thanks for the help again. I did what you mentioned and here's what it looks like now



I spent so much time staring at the previous iterations that I completely forgot what looks good and what doesn't, although this is the first version that made me think that it looks right.

What do you guys think?

 

It's part of the track now. Light paint on the track.

You can also use a bump spec T1. To create some thicker paint layer. UVset2 (bump and spec) need to match with UVset1.
And bump and spec map are based on the finish line texture.
UVset3 isn't needed anymore.

What can do to spice things up a bit:

Google some concrete, dirt, cracks textures.
Mix/blend (multiply, darken,... what ever you like) it in photoshop on the finish line texture. to give it a less uniform color.

In the end you are the artist... choose whatever you like.

 

Nice! Thanks for the help man, appreciate it.

One thing that is really tripping me out is texturing. I understand that the big trackmaking boys go out and photograph their own textures, sometimes even straight at the tracks themselves, but where can a noob like me source some good textures? Finding that finish line texture was really hard already. Personally, I'm only used to converting tracks, so pretty much everything in this leap to making it from scratch is new to me. I'd like to make everything from scratch this time, that way I can get a grasp of the entire development process from start to finish, so I'm trying to avoid using S397 textures as much as possible (the road is still S397, I plan to change that in the future).

 

I admire this. But it's going to be a hugh task to do everything from scatch as a hobby modder.
And it's OK to use S397 for rF2 tracks. These are made to fit the rF2 shaders
Even S397 are "recycling" textures and TSO.

I do believe @Nuno Lourenço has texture database for rF2.

https://forum.studio-397.com/index.php?threads/tired-of-ugly-tracks-in-a-2014-game.42766/


For creating game prop textures, normal and specular map: This is a nice simple 4 video tutorial:
For rF2: you can covert the black and white bump map into a normal map with photoshop and the nvidea plugin. Make sure you invert Y-axis in the nvidea normal map plugin.

Video1:

 

Haha yeah it will be tough. But it doesn't hurt to try and see what ends up happening does it?

Is there any information on how S397 does their texturing? For tracks like Indianapolis/AMP/Silverstone I guess it's kinda obvious they just tap into their survey material, but what about Toban or the other fictional tracks?

Thanks for the video tutorial. I'll watch it later.

 

@Tuttle , @Luc Van Camp ???

 

Looks like the picture attachments didn't carry over to the new forum.

 

Oooh that is very nice. That will be very helpful, thanks man.