Problem with textures on segments (GMAX)

[HugoPiugo]

Hey. So I've been working on this scenery for 2 days, and I was having some troubles while watching tutorials because it's my first time doing it.
I allways followed the tutorial, but after it came to the part of dividing the plane and insert the textures in the segments it looks nice right?

But when I unselected Edge Faces look how is it:

I have no idea of what this is and how to fix it. Any suggestions? (The textures are 1024x1024)

 

[Shaun]

Is it a gap?

 

[HugoPiugo]

Is it a gap?

Is the texture that is too small for that segment, so it repeats.

 

[Shaun]

Well you still need to make sure black lines don't show in fsx by making it 1020x1020 on a 1024x1024 sheet and unwrapping it 2pix in on each corner.

How it appears there will change in the sim.

 

[HugoPiugo]

Well you still need to make sure black lines don't show in fsx by making it 1020x1020 on a 1024x1024 sheet and unwrapping it 2pix in on each corner.

How it appears there will change in the sim.

thank you for your help. I'm kind of new so I don't know much about this. I said above that the texture is too small, but it isn't. I made a square plane 1000x1000 with segments 5 to 5, applied other 1024x1024 textures and it got those gaps again. So it looks like it's a gmax problem.
Also, I tried to convert to FSX and what I see is exactly what is in gmax, including the gaps.

 

[bob5568]

I'd suggest you upload your gmax file. This stuff is always easy to fix, but hard to be sure what's up, and hard to discuss as you seem early in the learning curve.

 

[HugoPiugo]

I'd suggest you upload your gmax file. This stuff is always easy to fix, but hard to be sure what's up, and hard to discuss as you seem early in the learning curve.

Okay. So I couldn't upload via "Upload File" here in the forum because it didn't recognize any format. Here is the link to download via dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/s/z5q6lnkl84935ms/Gmax File.rar?dl=0
(includes the textures)

Thank you guys for your help, hope you can help me.

 

[bob5568]

You have a pretty fancy mapping applied, with one material consisting of many multi-materials, each of which is mapped by your textures. Unfortunately I suspect the mapping was done by some automation, and doesn't give you access to altering the UV maps. (or perhaps its been too long since I used Gmax).

There are no physical gaps in your model, your verts are welded. The issue must be the commonly known problem with gmax offering complete reproduction of the final pixel per image sheet.

My fix made sense using a more manual method. I used to detach every poly in this kind of a plane, and then map them individually. That allowed me to planar map each poly individually, and then move the uv map texture vert inboard to about the 2nd or so pixel. Then I would re-attach the polys before export.

I also had a trick to improve the flow between textures, but lets see if you can find a way to alter your mapping first.

 

[HugoPiugo]

You have a pretty fancy mapping applied, with one material consisting of many multi-materials, each of which is mapped by your textures. Unfortunately I suspect the mapping was done by some automation, and doesn't give you access to altering the UV maps. (or perhaps its been too long since I used Gmax).

There are no physical gaps in your model, your verts are welded. The issue must be the commonly known problem with gmax offering complete reproduction of the final pixel per image sheet.

My fix made sense using a more manual method. I used to detach every poly in this kind of a plane, and then map them individually. That allowed me to planar map each poly individually, and then move the uv map texture vert inboard to about the 2nd or so pixel. Then I would re-attach the polys before export.

I also had a trick to improve the flow between textures, but lets see if you can find a way to alter your mapping first.

Okay, so my Gmax file doesn't look like that anymore. Those gaps don't exist in the gmax. Turns out it was some settings at the Options of gmax.
But my FSX looks like this:

Is that normal? Can I get rid of it?

 

[bob5568]

My answer is clearly the fix. You just have to find out how to adjust the uv mapping. I know how I would do it, but you are following someone else's methods via a tutorial, so that makes it pretty hard. Perhaps it would help if you share a link to the tutorial?

 

[HugoPiugo]

My answer is clearly the fix. You just have to find out how to adjust the uv mapping. I know how I would do it, but you are following someone else's methods via a tutorial, so that makes it pretty hard. Perhaps it would help if you share a link to the tutorial?

here it is. I don't know much about gmax, I'm still learning. If you could give me some headlights and tell me how you'd fix it, I'd be really gratefull. Thank you very much for your help until now!

 

[bob5568]

ok, I watched enough to see that he didn't apply individual uv maps per polygon. That's what I need to do to fix this problem.
Imagine each of your images support a unique material. Each polygon stands on its own and gets its own material.

Altering the texture maps:

First increase the canvas size to 1026x1026. Then copy just the first row of pixelx of imagery and paste in into the blank row above it. Do the same for the other three sides. Finally using "image size", resample the image back to 1024x1024.

mapping the images indivdually onto each poly:

Now in gmax, select one of the polys and "detach". Now that poly is its own object. Give it a material, that is the one with the correct image mapped....of course this time your image has been edited to have duplicated first and second pixels.

Add a Unwrap UVW modifier. Choose select face. Then click edit, and planar map. You should see the corners of the uvw mapping appear in the dialog. Adjust those inboard by a pixel.

Do that to all your polys, and you'll no longer have the lines in the export.
If you want you can attach each polygon, which lets you export a single plane.

 

[HugoPiugo]

Add a Unwrap UVW modifier. Choose select face. Then click edit, and planar map. You should see the corners of the uvw mapping appear in the dialog. Adjust those inboard by a pixel.

ok, I lost you there, sorry for my ignorance on gmax.
So, I added a Unwrap UVW, then this is what I have:


Clicked Edit and there's any corners there. Also, the only planar map I see is before clicking Edit, where the mouse is... I clicked it too, and nothing.
Again, sorry for my lack of knowledge, and thank you very much for your pacience.

 

[bob5568]

no problem, gmax is somewhat fussy. look at the modifier stack. See the "plus sign" in the black square next to the word "Unwrap UVW"? Click on that, and the modifer will expand. Then click on "face", then, planar, then edit.

 

[jtanabodee]

I have done a tutorial about this: http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/ind...:_How_to_eliminate_lines_between_each_polygon

 

[HugoPiugo]

no problem, gmax is somewhat fussy. look at the modifier stack. See the "plus sign" in the black square next to the word "Unwrap UVW"? Click on that, and the modifer will expand. Then click on "face", then, planar, then edit.

Thank you very much. It takes out that so visible weird line. Thank you for your pacience.

I have done a tutorial about this: http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/ind...:_How_to_eliminate_lines_between_each_polygon

Thank you!

But, to be honest, I'm still confused. I've seen some forums and that was the only possible fix, but is still visible that the texture doesn't match perfectly. It's much much better, but visible. Like this:
My question is: why didn't this happen to the tutorial that I've uploaded up there? I even did with the same airport, same tiles, same everything. Am I missing something? Is this a software problem? And what about the add-ons that we buy? do they have this "lines" but overlapped by noise?

 

[jtanabodee]

It is hard to make it perfect align. So I change to Photoscenery by resample.exe. Ground poly satellite photo is just for fs2004 version.

 

[bob5568]

When you changed the uvw coordinate mapping in gmax, perhaps you moved them too far? We remapped the texture so that the first 2 rows of pixels were the same. So, if the image was aligned to its neighbor before the picture was sliced, it should line up now, although I have no idea how you sliced it. If, when you cut the image apart, you lost a pixel or 2, it will never line up. If your images are not missing any pixels, then you probably moved the uvw coordinates too far. In gmax, in the uvwmap edit window, select both pixels that will move together, and then zoom in until you see the pixellation of the image before you move those coordinates. Put the limits of the new mapping after the first pixel, but before the second.

One of the challenges with using tutorials for training, is you never know if the author is using a worthwhile workflow or tool-set. I cannot answer your question about that tutorial. I do know this problem has been researched by a lot of folks, and my solution is commonly used.

By the way, Tic's suggestion above is wise if you are ok with low resolution when sitting on the ground. I've never achieved the quality of resolution using resample.exe as I can using ground polys, when it comes to ground operation surfaces. For tarmacs, taxiways and runways I use the ground poly approach for all versions of the sim.

 

[HugoPiugo]

When you changed the uvw coordinate mapping in gmax, perhaps you moved them too far?.

Here are examples of what I'm talking about:

(the line that is very noticeable)
Here's how the uvw coordinates are:

Now, the only thing I quite didn't understand, and so I might have not done it right is the part of the image size to 1026x1026. Because, we give it that size, but then resize it to 1024x1024? Shouldn't we keep it 1026x1026 and then using uvw unrap we adjust 1 pixel inboard each side, that makes the image 1024x1024 in gmax. So I didn't quite understand that part:

First increase the canvas size to 1026x1026. Finally using "image size", resample the image back to 1024x1024.

Why resample the image back to 1024x1024? Isn't that the same as not to edit the size?

Also:

On FSX, when we're close to the polygon it's little noticeable, but when we move away the "line" gets so much more visible. While we're approaching it starts decreasing. Does it has to do with what I might have done wrong?

 

[bob5568]

Increasing canvas size is totally different from re sampling. When you change the canvas size, you actually add (or subtract) pixels from the image. My suggestion was to add a pixel "all around" the image, making the resultant image 1026x1026. Then you add a copy of the edge data all around to fill that space.

When you "resample", you redistribute the existing data over a different pixel count. That's why there are so many options as to which re sampling routine to use (at least in photoshop). What you end up with is an image in which all the unique data is contained within the inner 1022 or so pixels with 1px of redundancy at the edge. When you adjust the uvw mapping in gmax, you move the edge of the mapping 1 pixel inboard. Now GMAX actually uses the unique 1022x1022 of information, but doesn't fade out the edges because its not mapping to the image edge.

By not editing the size, you would have unique data over the entire 1024x1024 (this is what you started with). Thus, you'll either suffer lines between the panels becuase gmax doesn't do a good job with the edge of polygons, or you'll have no line but noticeably bad match between images after you move the uvw mapping handles inboard by one pixel.

You can't keep the image at 1026x1026 because the sim ONLY accepts images in powers of 2. You want whatever you use as a material in gmax to match the "texture" you supply to fsx.

Now that you showed a bad match, I had to assume something went wrong in your image manipulation, like you didn't do what I intended with canvas size and resampling, or you moved the uvw coordinates too far.

EDIT: I just noticed you included a screenshot of your uvw mapping. You did that part right, but notice your image doesn't have duplicated information in the first two pixels, thus you'll get the bad match you see.