The second,  it ain't worth it, start over.  Don't be hard headed.

Then, never go over what you did in the past with a critical eye.  Do it before you post it and you won't feel embarrassed later.  Probably won't post it either.

Looking at this one, and it's been really reworked, I wonder, how many buildings are sided with two by ten lumber?  At least, it's substantial.

Poly count isn't always the enemy.  Sure, low counts load fast, render fast, and almost always have problems with textures, unless they're pretty small to begin with.

I had planned on throwing out the yard light, didn't like this, didn't like that, and it didn't take long to get what I thought it should have looked like to begin with.

This render is a little dark, but the lighting was the reason for the render, in a daylight lighting, the shade on the light shows up pretty well.

And making corrugated sheets is a royal PITA.  That's why this roof isn't corrugated, yet.

Have fun, or quit. 

Doric.

making the corrugated panels was easy for me

whay style do you want or need? the old style rounded ribs or the more popular for houses square ribs?

Quote - making the corrugated panels was easy for me

whay style do you want or need? the old style rounded ribs or the more popular for houses square ribs?

 

It'll be the old style rounded.  I'm just being lazy at the moment. I really need to make only one sheet, then duplicate that to get a roof or whatever.  I might jink and use Povray to make a shingle, random width, map and displacement.  Have to see if I can get the lighting right for the displacement though, haven't tried that yet. Doric.

It would be worth a try, but if a .obj was included, I could probably suck it into wings if I have to trim width.  Scaling across the corrugation wouldn't work for that.  And the .obj would probably be even better, then I could assemble it in wings instead of having to try in Poser. 

Doric.

i only make .objs for now and the scaling is to the manufacturers scale

the sheets are designed as 4 foot by 8 foot which was the original size that was used for roofing but now they come  in longer versions

i model at huge scal so it will need to be scaled for the need

Quote - Poly count isn't always the enemy.  Sure, low counts load fast, render fast, and almost always have problems with textures, unless they're pretty small to begin with.

Can you elaborate on the texture problems? How are they connected to polygon count?

Texture  problem is siding has lots of long narrow rectangles, and poser makes them long narrow triangles that look like sh** when rendered.  Or, on larger areas, I usually end up with a nasty looking diagonal shadow across them. Changing to hard edges once it's modeled  and then breaking that up with soft edges, more polys, but it eliminates most of that.  If there's still some left, I go back and cut that face up again, usually eliminates it.

Doric.

Quote - i only make .objs for now and the scaling is to the manufacturers scale

the sheets are designed as 4 foot by 8 foot which was the original size that was used for roofing but now they come  in longer versions

i model at huge scal so it will need to be scaled for the need

 

 

.obj is fine.  And four by eight seems to be the standard for corrugated, sheet metal, steel plate, drywall and plywood, along with a host of other things I'm not aware of.  After I model something, I pull it into poser, scale it there, then use that same scale factor in Wings to get the final size, so no problem there. 

Doric.

(disregard bit about bevels, from a different conversation)

...You can also avoid those artifacts by using a one sided geometry.

(there's nothing for poser to smooth across, if this makes any sense).

When you add more polys by subdividing you are in a sense just adding control edges involuntarily with alot of additional, unnecessary edges or polys.

BTW, hard edges applied in wings are irrelevant in poser.

ok dorik it is uploaded in a bit they will approve it

"BTW, hard edges applied in wings are irrelevant in poser."

Huh ?

At least in PP-2012, they work absolutely fine.

Left bevelled edge

Middle hard edge

Right soft edge

Quote - This render is a little dark, but the lighting was the reason for the render, in a daylight lighting, the shade on the light shows up pretty well.

It's the darkest render I've seen on this site.  You should check your gamma settings.

Here I added four control loops to the edges.

Doesn't look any better than the hard edged object in the middle but almost doubled the polygon count.

I wonder why Carrara's creases don't hold in Poser?  I'm gonna try again.

Carrara 5.1 Pro adds "vn" lines in my OBJs if I have creased edges.  Both Modo 601 and Vue 9.5. Infinite recognize "vn".  But Poser 6 doesn't.

What difference does Wings3D add to OBJs with creasing that Poser recognizes?

This is a six sided cube exported from Wings with soft edges:

Exported from Wings 3D 1.4.1.2011-09-24---17-38.mlab

mtllib CubeSoft.mtl
o cube1
#8 vertices, 6 faces
v -5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2
v -5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2
v 5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2
v 5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2
v -5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2
v -5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2
v 5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2
v 5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2
vn -0.57735027 -0.57735027 0.57735027
vn -0.57735027 0.57735027 0.57735027
vn 0.57735027 0.57735027 0.57735027
vn 0.57735027 -0.57735027 0.57735027
vn -0.57735027 -0.57735027 -0.57735027
vn -0.57735027 0.57735027 -0.57735027
vn 0.57735027 0.57735027 -0.57735027
vn 0.57735027 -0.57735027 -0.57735027
g cube1
usemtl default
s 1
f 1//1 4//4 3//3 2//2
f 1//1 5//5 8//8 4//4
f 2//2 6//6 5//5 1//1
f 3//3 7//7 6//6 2//2
f 4//4 8//8 7//7 3//3
f 6//6 7//7 8//8 5//5

The same cube with hard edges:

Exported from Wings 3D 1.4.1.2011-09-24---17-38.mlab

mtllib Cubehard.mtl
o cube1
#8 vertices, 6 faces
v -5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2
v -5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2
v 5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2
v 5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2
v -5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2
v -5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2
v 5.0000000e-2 5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2
v 5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2 -5.0000000e-2
vn 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0 1.00000000
vn 0.0000000e+0 -1.00000000 0.0000000e+0
vn -1.00000000 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0 1.00000000
vn 0.0000000e+0 1.00000000 0.0000000e+0
vn -1.00000000 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0 1.00000000
vn 1.00000000 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 1.00000000 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0 1.00000000
vn 1.00000000 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 -1.00000000 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 -1.00000000 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0 -1.00000000
vn -1.00000000 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 1.00000000 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0 -1.00000000
vn -1.00000000 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0
vn 1.00000000 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 1.00000000 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0 -1.00000000
vn 1.00000000 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 -1.00000000 0.0000000e+0
vn 0.0000000e+0 0.0000000e+0 -1.00000000
g cube1
usemtl default
s 1
f 1//1 4//10 3//7 2//4
f 6//17 7//21 8//24 5//14
s 2
f 2//6 6//18 5//15 1//3
f 4//11 8//22 7//19 3//8
s 3
f 1//2 5//13 8//23 4//12
f 3//9 7//20 6//16 2//5

But Poser 6 won't recognize hard edges anyway.

I think you need at least 8 or even Poser 9.

Quote - But Poser 6 won't recognize hard edges anyway. I think you need at least 8 or even Poser 9.

Ok. I was wondering because you said PP-2012.  So I thought Poser Pro 4 - Poser Pro 2012.  PP is etched into my brain as pre-Poser 5.

Poser 1

Poser 2

Poser 3

Poser 4  /  Poser 4 ProPack

Poser 5

Poser 6

Poser 7 / Poser Pro

Poser 8 / Poser Pro 2010

Poser 9 / Poser Pro 2012

(And somewhere around Poser 6 there were also Poser Artist and Poser Debut)

:-)

Quote - (And somewhere around Poser 6 there were also Poser Artist and Poser Debut)

And some incest maketing between Curious Labs and Eovia.  The best era I think, after Fractal Designs broke apart.

After I used Irfan to crank the brightness of that picture up by 500%, I'd say the siding is about right.  Pre-1930 clapboards were much narrower.  But the vast majority of siding on recent houses has about 8 to 10 inches "to the weather", as they say.

Quote - ...You can also avoid those artifacts by using a one sided geometry.

(there's nothing for poser to smooth across, if this makes any sense).

Wings doesn't do one sided geometry.

D.

Quote - After I used Irfan to crank the brightness of that picture up by 500%, I'd say the siding is about right.  Pre-1930 clapboards were much narrower.  But the vast majority of siding on recent houses has about 8 to 10 inches "to the weather", as they say.

Looking out the window, at my garage, is where I take the example I'm using. The house to the north of me is sided with vinyl, granted, much wider.  But not what I'm working for.  I've been driving into some areas where I wouldn't normally go, just looking at the older, poorly maintained buildings to get some ideas.  But that particular shed, I'm done with now, time to start over and do it right the second time.

D.

Quote - Carrara 5.1 Pro adds "vn" lines in my OBJs if I have creased edges.  Both Modo 601 and Vue 9.5. Infinite recognize "vn".  But Poser 6 doesn't.

What difference does Wings3D add to OBJs with creasing that Poser recognizes?

The reason I use hard edges in Wings is if you smooth without them, the result is not what you want.  By leaving the smoothing as soft edges, they don't show, if hard they really would. Going to be a few days before I try anything more, eyes are not liking what I've been asking them to do.  Don't get old, it ain't worth the price.

D.

Quote - ok dorik it is uploaded in a bit they will approve it

Got it.  Give it a try when the eyes decide to work again.  Thanks.

Doric.

"Wings doesn't do one sided geometry."

Yes it does. What version of Wings are you using ?

Wings does indeed allow the creation of one sided geometry, you just need to do a little exporting (sure that's a PITA, but nevertheless)... select the faces of the object that you want to have as one sided, export selected, reimport. Bingo, one sided geometry. Just be careful that you do not add a material to overwrite the hole material generated by Wings otherwise Wings will replace the non geometry "face" with a poly.

Test that.

Ummm, Joepublic... the object that you are using for your one sided geometry example looks like it has a face where there should be a hole material (unless you've changed the default hole mat color), so that's not actually a one sided geometry. the interior of the sphere is actually a poly, check and compare your poly count.

a one sided geometry has no polygons on the inverse side, hence no normals, hence... one sided.

It would be great if wings allowed you to create and extrude a poly (like Blender, Hex, C4D, Maya, Carrara, etc.)... alas, no. It adheres unrelentingly to the Box Modeler precept.

What are you guys defining a one-sided polygon as?

"a one sided geometry has no polygons on the inverse side, hence no normals, hence... one sided."

at least that is how I'm approaching it, does a one sided geometry actually have a poly on the inverse and simply no normal? Does a poly read as opaque if it has no normal data to react to lighting?

There's another stumbling block in wings, the way the app handles holes.

"What are you guys defining a one-sided polygon as?"

How do you define a one sided poly? I'm assuming you have the answer to this, so don't hold back. My definition might be in error (its happened more often than not with such things).

Ok.  I first ran into flipped normals when I began modeling in Amapi Designer 7.  Before then, I used Ray Dream Designer 3 which I think treated polygons as double-sided.  Amapi made the distinction through use of normals.  So when I imported into Poser 5 from Amapi for the first time (and into Carrara 4), the "missing" polygons were driving me nuts.  They were like holes.  But then I learned that newer apps were going towards  single-sided polys as default (you could still turn on double-sided, Vue defaults to double-sided still).

I do most of my modeling in Hexagon 1.21 now.  I like its GUI and modeling tools.  For NURBS, I use Amapi Pro 7.51.  Both are very aware of normals needing adjusting.  They both have a unification tool to flip all normals the same direction in one click.

In this case, one half-sphere is hollow, the other is not.

Maybe a poly is simply the presence of a normal? hmmm, I'll have to brush up on my poly lore. Looking around, it seems that a one sided poly is actually impossible as it "must have at least 3 sides so that it can enclose an area."

@joepublic, yeah... I was thrown off by your hole material not being the default blue I think? As I said earlier the way that Wings handles holes can be pretty confusing or frustrating.

Joepublic, so if I assign the hole material to an objects polys, those polys won't show in poser? I'll go check that out to see.

The material is lit differently, whatever it is you're doing to your sphere.  Apps that don't understand normals, that render objects with flipped normals, results in objects having that appearance (shaded where it should be lit).

the original sphere reads as having 128 polys, whereas the hole assigned sphere has 120 polys. So it's not a case of the normals being flipped. Unless the presence of a normal is the definition of a poly.

It's a little hard to test this in Poser as Poser assigns normals (even if they have been removed via, say, UVMapper) upon import. As does wings apparently.

I suppose that it's a moot point because a poly without normal information would simply exist as data rather than a visual phenomena?