smooth fuselages

[noob24]

i see these beautifully modelled smooth fuselage airliners everywhere and dont see much evidence of mesh smooth /turbo smoothing being used. there are no nurb type curves in edges and windows doors remain sharp yet the fuselages are rounded and smoothed particulally around the nose areas for example. as soon as i apply a mesh smooth modifier in 3dsmax i start to see nurbs iterations in the edges and my geometery distorting and loss of straight lines. so i then remove the mesh smooth and try to manipulate the edges and vert manually but end up with a horrible jagged surface not smooth at all.

can anyone tell me the secret to getting a smooth contoured surface whilst maintaing my shapes and lines. i never see models created with nurms for fsx ( other than very small object or nose cones perhaps) and i know the poly count is far higher and would probably be useless for a large complex airliner for example.



thanks

 

[hcornea]

I think you'll find it has more to do with applying smoothing groups appropriately than the method of geometry creation (poly / nurb / meshsmooth)

You obviously need enough vertices, however.

EDIT: Your plane looks nice ... which aspect of how it is turning out is bothering you? (may need to see in-sim)

 

[noob24]

ah these are not my creations just some freely distributed souce file examples i think from here for practising on.

regarding smoothing groups as far as am aware they help define sharp edges and smooth ones between groups of polys right but wont create nice smooth geometery, they are just divisions. rather than making a divide between a smoothed area and a non smoothed area or areas with different degrees of smoothing for texturing? i cant find a way of making a certain area smooth without is having at least some effect on the surrounding polys. for example the smooted fuse around the flightdeck windows and then the contrast of the the sharp edges of the windows and glass which are all angular . in these images there is no averlap or distortion of the windows despite smooth fuse surrounding them. how is this done?

 

[hcornea]

Smoothing groups choose which areas are smoothed together ...

 

[lionheart]

Making flat airliner windows (cockpit area) on a round tube airliner fuselage is one of the hardest things to do. How some of these guys do it is amazing.


Two kinds of smoothing as you know.

Mesh Smooth; (can add Iterations of Mesh complexity, but at a huge price, tons of Vertices).

Smooth; Just makes the sufaces 'appear' smooth, but does nothing to the Mesh complexity.

 

[n4gix]

Smoothing affects the polygon's normals direction. It's difficult to explain just how normals work in mere words, but...

...two polygons that're at a slight angle to one another (such as a curved fuselage for example) who share the same smoothing group will force each polygon's normals to "lean towards each other" with the result that the transition where they join (their shared edges) are "smooth."

With no common smoothing group assignment, the two polygons's shared edges will appear "sharp," because both polgon's normals are perpendicular to the surface.

 

[tgibson]

Hi,

They are not using Mesh Smoothing, but are using Polygon Smoothing instead. As Bill says, this only affects the polygon's normals, not their shape.

Hope this helps,

 

[noob24]

Hi,

They are not using Mesh Smoothing, but are using Polygon Smoothing instead. As Bill says, this only affects the polygon's normals, not their shape.

Hope this helps,

but just using smoothing groups does not make nice smooth geometery if its physically jagged in the first place i understand the whole normals orientation thing between polys. smoohting groups will only give the illusion of a smooth edge transition between adjacent polygons rather than sharp edges as described here by Bill by altering the angle of the normals so they match the next poly. but if those two polys are at 45 degrees to each other making them both the same smooting group will not magically make a smooth mesh as it wont change the geometery physically it just smooths the appearence of the texture at the edge.

besides smoothing groups are automatic by default in max i think so are already present and may just need a little adjusting etc etc. so my jagged fuse already has smoothing groups smoothing it and its still jagged.

 

[n4gix]

Keep in mind that the real affect of "smoothing groups" won't be seen until you put the thing in the sim...

...so don't judge the effectiveness of smoothing based on what you see in the viewport.

 

[hcornea]

but just using smoothing groups does not make nice smooth geometery if its physically jagged in the first place i understand the whole normals orientation thing between polys

....... but if those two polys are at 45 degrees to each other making them both the same smooting group will not magically make a smooth mesh ...
.

You do have to do SOME modelling obviously ... but often this is more about using the right base shape, and altering it appropriately.

If you resort to automated tools to tesselate or meshsmooth everything your poly-count will be astronomical.

Smoothing groups are "automatic" in Gmax to some extent too, but that does NOT mean that they are applied the way you want them. I usually pull them all off at some point and apply them manually.

You would be amazed at how much effect an applied smoothing group has in-sim .. the preview is just an idea.

I think you need to do some experimenting to work out what poly/mesh resolution you need to enable the smoothing to give the "look" you want.

 

[N2056]

This was a big help for me...
http://www.youtube.com/user/gibbage1#p/u/9/-Iswm1xKtGs

 

[noob24]

thanks all.

i have seen that utube video on smoothing groups before however its based on an already perfectly formed (in geometery terms) sphere obvoiusly created perfectly round /uniform automatically upon creation which is easy to then make look perfect using segment amounts and smoothing groups to add finishing touches

i think there are two issues being confused here. im not on about smoothing groups i understand them they will only add a smooth appearence to geometary that is already nicely contoured they will not alter the actual contours.
im talking about getting this geometary nicely contoured in the first place without using meshsmooth/ turbosmooth etc etc.

i can modell ok but getting nice smooth custom shapes and contours without lumps is the problem i have if i dont use meshsmooth.

i make all sorts of lovely smooth objects for projects outside fsx and using meshsmooth and turbosmooth or nurms is not a problem really as triangle/poly/ verticy count is not as crucial. and seccondly i just dont see it being used in fsx in the examples i have used in this thread as i dont see any iterations(between verts) and iterations equal more verts which is not acceptable for fsx .


as soon as i start manually pushing verts / loops/ polys around by hand i start seeing a nasty mesh appearing(which is fine outside fsx and is how i usually work and apply meshsmooth to fix. but without the use of meshmooth to fix it i cant find a way of getting it(the actual geometary) smooth

 

[hcornea]

Noob ... that is JUST the point.

Pushing isolated verts around will almost always produce jagged edges (unless you are correcting a small problem).

Start with the appropriate starting point: shape / primitive (technique: mesh edit, loft)
Ensure it has enough vertices to produce the effect you want from the outset if possible
Manipulate it properly using the appropriate tools

What you are asking, is "How do you make efficient models in FS?"

As you have correctly surmised, it is about technique, planning , and relying on smoothing to finish things off.

Automated tools are used sparingly, if at all IMO.

If you look at the shapes of the,engine nacelles, imagine what Primitive was used to make them, how many segments, how the vertices were scaled to create the contour and basic shape.

From the basic shape, adjustments were made (I'm guessing painstakingly), triangulation errors were picked out, and vertices welded.

Bear in mind, that that model probably took quite some while to make, with much of that time drawing on expertise to plan the progression from shape to final mesh.

Each model you make gets more efficient.

The PRECISE challenge in FS is to make models that both LOOK good and PERFORM ( = Acceptable Compromise)

As an exercise ... the attached pic started life as a 24 side cylinder, with 5 height segments. It is altered freeform, rather than to drawings ... and pretty inaccurate, but not jagged.

The vertices were scaled in groups

The cowling around the intake was created by extruding (negative ... ie INtrusion), which applies NO smoothing groups (these had to be applied manually.) Basic geometry ... basic modelling tools ... with tight control over the final vertex count.

 

[Heretic]

My 328 ans a training tool? Sweet!

Note: Since the release of the source file, I've reshaped the nose a bit though.


The trick for smoothness is smoothly flowing edges, say having them only slightly angled instead of sharply.

 

[noob24]

My 328 ans a training tool? Sweet!

Note: Since the release of the source file, I've reshaped the nose a bit though.


The trick for smoothness is smoothly flowing edges, say having them only slightly angled instead of sharply.

hi Bjoern


well thanks for sharing the 328 its been most usefull.

when you make the fuse do you start with a cylindar or maybe a sphere and adjust fom there, and do you make the nose section seperately and then attach later. am i right in saying you have not used any mesh smoothing tools for the fuse or nose?

 

[noob24]

Noob ... that is JUST the point.

Pushing isolated verts around will almost always produce jagged edges (unless you are correcting a small problem).

Start with the appropriate starting point: shape / primitive (technique: mesh edit, loft)
Ensure it has enough vertices to produce the effect you want from the outset if possible
Manipulate it properly using the appropriate tools

What you are asking, is "How do you make efficient models in FS?"

As you have correctly surmised, it is about technique, planning , and relying on smoothing to finish things off.

Automated tools are used sparingly, if at all IMO.

If you look at the shapes of the,engine nacelles, imagine what Primitive was used to make them, how many segments, how the vertices were scaled to create the contour and basic shape.

From the basic shape, adjustments were made (I'm guessing painstakingly), triangulation errors were picked out, and vertices welded.

Bear in mind, that that model probably took quite some while to make, with much of that time drawing on expertise to plan the progression from shape to final mesh.

Each model you make gets more efficient.

The PRECISE challenge in FS is to make models that both LOOK good and PERFORM ( = Acceptable Compromise)

As an exercise ... the attached pic started life as a 24 side cylinder, with 5 height segments. It is altered freeform, rather than to drawings ... and pretty inaccurate, but not jagged.

The vertices were scaled in groups

The cowling around the intake was created by extruding (negative ... ie INtrusion), which applies NO smoothing groups (these had to be applied manually.) Basic geometry ... basic modelling tools ... with tight control over the final vertex count.

thanks yes as i suspected i just wanted to know im not missing a trick somewhere thats why i had to understand this aspect of modelling for fsx. at least now i know im not doing it wrong i just need to plan more carefully from primatives

 

[Heretic]

when you make the fuse do you start with a cylindar or maybe a sphere and adjust fom there, and do you make the nose section seperately and then attach later. am i right in saying you have not used any mesh smoothing tools for the fuse or nose?

It used to be a cylinder and the nose had more nose jobs than your avergae Hollywood diva.

No smooth modifiers, it's all just smoothing groups.