Having worked my way through FSDS Versions 1 and 2 over the years with no major problems, I have attempted to use the Boolean facility in Version 3 to punch multiple window apertures through a fuselage. The holes are there alright but polygon distortion stretches out from the window corners along the fuselage. No matter how I try to re-arrange the points, the distortion just takes on a another form. If I then apply the polygon smoothing tool, the fuselage surface between and around the windows' area looks a mess. Is there any fix for this problem. Many thanks for any help anyone can offer.
-
Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:
- Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
- Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
- Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
- Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
- Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
- Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.
Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.
By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.
Boolean Again In Fsds 3
- Thread starter RORYPERI
- Start date
Roryperi,
You are describing exactly the situation I have faced with FSDS3 i.e. ending up with polys that are impossible to smooth correctly which spoils the look of the model. I found that making boolean cuts early in the design before you start editing points helps a bit, but it means you have to plan well ahead because you will lose usage flexiblity after the cutting e.g. you won't be able to add cross sections etc.
Sorry I can't give you a solid solution, just sympathy.
Maybe someone else has a way to overcome this problem, I'm going to try something other than FSDS3.
You are describing exactly the situation I have faced with FSDS3 i.e. ending up with polys that are impossible to smooth correctly which spoils the look of the model. I found that making boolean cuts early in the design before you start editing points helps a bit, but it means you have to plan well ahead because you will lose usage flexiblity after the cutting e.g. you won't be able to add cross sections etc.
Sorry I can't give you a solid solution, just sympathy.
Maybe someone else has a way to overcome this problem, I'm going to try something other than FSDS3.
Many people who - for whatever personal reasons they have - (masochism, membership in Opus Louis? mostly?) ...
Sorry, couldn't resist.....
FSDS boolean should be done on as small a set of polygons as possible (I tend to split off that part of the main "body" that will be booleanated). I will then clean up the vertices and reclaim/rebuild polygons, taking care that in a vertex cleanup (such as joining vertices together) a polygon doesn't get linearized.....
(Of course, if I have a number of cuts to do at the same time, I'll export the "tool" and part(s) to gmax, convert the part to ePoly and shape merge (mostly) the heck out of it.
Aha, well I suppose if what you say Bill, solves the "unsmoothable" poly problem then that's a workaround but I'd rather not use two different tools so I'll just switch to Gmax I think.
Being new to the modelling side of FS I think I'm missing some historical information that would appear to give insight into what people think and why. I guess the "Louis" reference made by Felix is about the author of FSDS but maybe I'm wrong. Still, it's a good example of not knowing what has gone before, I should probably read some old posts it seems.
A few years ago when I first started making gauges I exchanged a few emails with Nick Pike about modelling and he told me he used FSDS and Gmax. So I guess some people feel they possibly get the best of both worlds this way.
Being new to the modelling side of FS I think I'm missing some historical information that would appear to give insight into what people think and why. I guess the "Louis" reference made by Felix is about the author of FSDS but maybe I'm wrong. Still, it's a good example of not knowing what has gone before, I should probably read some old posts it seems.
A few years ago when I first started making gauges I exchanged a few emails with Nick Pike about modelling and he told me he used FSDS and Gmax. So I guess some people feel they possibly get the best of both worlds this way.
Bill,
What "converters" to use for export/import? Just *.x file format??
Thnx,
Larry
Many people who - for whatever personal reasons they have - choose to stick with FSDS3.x will export their object to GMax where they use the boolean and shape-merge tools, then re-export their object(s) back to FSDS3.x ...
What "converters" to use for export/import? Just *.x file format??
Thnx,
Larry
to GeoDEN
a bit of background....many years ago 3d modelling began for the developers with a text based process of coding points etc, which then morphed into a primitive gui. VOD by Rafael Sanchez was my first 3d object tool, which allowed for basic shapes and texture decoration, but product planning was quite manual. Rafael later produced a version of a gui called Nova and a dynamic object tool called DOD.
FSDS provided a paradigm shift...it was the first product to provide a true CAD feel to a gui for producing 3d objects. The author, Louis Sinclair, was personable, helpful, and the result was a new era for custom objects.
After fsds was out for a while, Microsoft struck a deal with Discrete (Autodesk) for a GMAX gamepack to make GMAX (a limited version of
3dsMax) available for flight sim object design. I know this was a personal disappointment for Louis, who had busted his "you know what" to bring CAD to fs, only to find himself competing with the little brother of 3dsmax. And worse yet for Louis, the business model of GMAX was to offer it for FREE, money was exchanged by the game developer for the export tool (the gamepack).
Now, a user could learn and use 3dsmax modelling for free. The boolean features and shapemerge were an example of tools that were available to users that never had been provided in fsds.
Louis had two remaining major advantages in the market, and essentially continues to enjoy market share due to this advantage. His interface was established by the time GMAX entered the market, and users were and are hesitant to switch over to the 3dsmax interface. In fact, its primarily this dynamic that gave gmax the reputation for having a steep learning curve. Second advantage was his personal support. The user base that remained with fsds was sufficient for FSDS development to continue, and now we see that the feature set of fsds is approaching that of GMAX, with a bit of a ways to go to see the results of a boolean work as well.
Enjoy!
Bob
a bit of background....many years ago 3d modelling began for the developers with a text based process of coding points etc, which then morphed into a primitive gui. VOD by Rafael Sanchez was my first 3d object tool, which allowed for basic shapes and texture decoration, but product planning was quite manual. Rafael later produced a version of a gui called Nova and a dynamic object tool called DOD.
FSDS provided a paradigm shift...it was the first product to provide a true CAD feel to a gui for producing 3d objects. The author, Louis Sinclair, was personable, helpful, and the result was a new era for custom objects.
After fsds was out for a while, Microsoft struck a deal with Discrete (Autodesk) for a GMAX gamepack to make GMAX (a limited version of
3dsMax) available for flight sim object design. I know this was a personal disappointment for Louis, who had busted his "you know what" to bring CAD to fs, only to find himself competing with the little brother of 3dsmax. And worse yet for Louis, the business model of GMAX was to offer it for FREE, money was exchanged by the game developer for the export tool (the gamepack).
Now, a user could learn and use 3dsmax modelling for free. The boolean features and shapemerge were an example of tools that were available to users that never had been provided in fsds.
Louis had two remaining major advantages in the market, and essentially continues to enjoy market share due to this advantage. His interface was established by the time GMAX entered the market, and users were and are hesitant to switch over to the 3dsmax interface. In fact, its primarily this dynamic that gave gmax the reputation for having a steep learning curve. Second advantage was his personal support. The user base that remained with fsds was sufficient for FSDS development to continue, and now we see that the feature set of fsds is approaching that of GMAX, with a bit of a ways to go to see the results of a boolean work as well.
Enjoy!
Bob
Bob - and in my opinion, the single greatest advantage for the flightsim modeller is that since FSDS is a flightsim modelling program, compiling the object - scenery or aircraft - has always been a "single click" operation. For aircraft, especially, all (basic) folders and hierarchies are created.
FSDS3.5 is an interim upgrade, designed to extract FS-X compatibility for objects and models made with FSDS3, and paying attention to many of the FS-X features and eye-candy.
gmax remains the more powerful modelling program, but FSDS remains the tool of choice for many flightsim modellers