Archangel35757

Another quick update on his chest armor plating (magenta piece):

Just a quick update on the IG Lancer variant:

@@DT85. -- Are the vertex normals correct when you don't rotate the model 90 degrees (I.e. leave it face down on ground) during export?

I've emailed @@DT85 a new v1.9 dotXSI exporter which should fix the bad vertex normal orientations for the legacy export options. I'm still working on the code for the new vertex normal export options (to support smooth groups and explicit normals).

Nope. Doesn't work on the native android app. I have to use Firefox app.

@@Azatha -- How are you creating new lightsaber sounds? I've been meaning to play with my Foley Studio plugin for 3ds Max that records 3D sounds inside 3ds Max... that also captures the "Doppler effect" (i.e., how it sounds when you swing it...). All sounds for this animation were rendered out using Foley Studio plugin (using SFX files of course)...

Here you go... I appreciate your time and mentoring...

Which one do you prefer? wip52e or wip52f ? Also, would you sketch (red-line) on my picture to show me how you think the upper-lip "M" contour should go? Thanks...

So I tried to work on the corners of the lips... This was my first attempt (wip52c): I didn't like it so I went back and tweaked an earlier version (wip52e): And here is WIP52e without colored lips: ...and I went back and re-worked wip52c (tweaking the corners) and saved it as wip52f here: @Pysk0Sith -- close enough?

@@Barricade24, sorry no... I've been busy traveling for work and brainstorming about how to fix the dotXSI exporters for 3dsMax. I'm about to work on the Raven's Claw model in a few minutes. I will have some time this weekend and I will try and make some progess on Jan Ors, Raven's Claw, and IG-88. I also have to travel next week... but I can take my new laptop with me and work on the model projects in the evenings. ...seems like I never have enough time. I guess I just need to win the lottery...

@@Xycaleth- (I know you are on somewhat of a sabbatical) ...but-- any progress on the new ModView tool?

I think I'm going to reduce these options to only add the "specified/explicit" option... so the artist will have to set smoothgroups or custom normals themselves in 3ds Max.

I doubt Adam Driver is Luke's son-- more likely Han & Liea's. And I think he has daddy issues and strikes down (killing) Han.

I need @@DT85 and @@minilogoguy18 to help make a test case in 3dsMax (DT85) and Softimage (minilogoguy18) ...something simple like a box at the origin and extrude each square face out along the positive X, Y, Z axes (like making a coordinate tripod)... textured in red, green, and blue... coordinate on the dimensions... also something with explicit normals or multiple smoothing groups... (I could do this in Max but I'd fumble for hours using Softimage).

Update: This is going to take longer than anticipated... looking deeper into the code (and knocking the rust off my brain...) and the linear way that they exported the dotXSI templates and nested children templates complicates matters. It's compounded by the fact that the dotXSI format breaks a mesh's data like so: SI_Mesh { SI_Shape { … } SI_TriangleList { … } } And there is a separate class export method (::ExportMesh, ::ExportShape, ::ExportTraingleList, etc.) for exporting each template (SI_Mesh, SI_Shape, SI_TriangleList, etc.). And they all take a pointer to the original Node container. So each time they re-get the mesh object contained within the Node container and they process the mesh again to only write out the data required by each dotXSI template. The SI_Shape template lists out the actual vertex positions (Point3 values), vertex normals (Normalized Point3 values), and vertex UV coordinates in UV space (Point2 values). It is in the SI_Shape template that I need to do the Max-to-XSI coordinate transformation on the vertex normals... and that should fix the bad normals that @@DT85 posted about. But it's going to be more complicated to do SmoothGroup/Explicit normals because I'll either have to redo all calculations for each child template to extract the specific data each template requires... or do the calculations once and come up with a clever way to re-access the already computed results in the children templates. My opinion, is to attempt the latter so as to save processing time. Stay tuned...

Configure one and see: http://www.avadirect.com/custom-gaming-laptops

So what internet browsers (for older Android) do you support besides Chrome and Firefox?

I just bought a 17" gaming laptop from AVA Direct (best prices I could find)... and I decked it out with upgrades to be a graphics workstation. Check out their laptop options and customize it for what you want.

Quick Update: So I haven't made the progress I would have liked... ...but I have the Max2013 C++ project updated as dotXSI 3.0 v1.9 Beta and I have the export dialog updated with all of the new vertex normal export options. I also have the class methods updated so that all the new vertex normal methods are there at least in skeleton form (...and both x86 and x64 projects compile successfully). All I need to do now is write the five new methods (and correct the original two...) -- and then beta test it with @@DT85's help. Hopefully by the latter part of next week (I have to travel for work the first part of the week) I'll have a plugin for DT85 to test. EDIT: Once I get the Max 2013 exporter working properly... I will apply the changes/corrections and update all exporter plugins for Max6 thru Max2016 to v1.9.

Like @@mrwonko said, in the GLM format a vert can have only one UV texture coordinate... if you split the mesh along UV seams inside 3dsMax before exporting... then Carcass should not add any new verts along the UV seams. I think only the 3dsMax exporter needs fixing.

According to @@minilogoguy18 Carcass already unifies the normals along the UV seams where it inserts duplicate verts (per @@mrwonko)... so I think that all that needs to happen is for me to fix the vertex normals exporting in the dotXSI exporter. No -smooth switch needed. I'll get crackin' on this tomorrow and hopefully will have a beta v1.9 for you to test this weekend.

Oh... Consider This Request Efficacious Ensiform

So there is no "fix" for that since it's inherent in the GLM format. Best you can do is ensure the normals at that UV boundary are identical. Correct?

So @@minilogoguy18 did the above test in Softimage... ...why would Carcass split the mesh along UV seams? @@DT85, @@Psyk0Sith, @@Xycaleth? ??

It is just one of carcass' command switches like (-smooth).