Just a few things I've found.  The first, it is possible to repair a messed up .obj.

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.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

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.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

would this work for you? ill have the UVmaps ready in a few minutes and could upload it tonight

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.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

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?

hmmm, curious also. Here's a preview image of a single poly (the one sided square primitive) with a 2000x2000 pixel texture applied... (?)

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.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

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.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

the diagonal shadows are smoothing artifacts from not using control edges probably. does it look like this?

(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.

You end up with this...

when all you really need is this.

Here's how it looks in poser.

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.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

 

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.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

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?

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

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.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

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.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

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.

My python page
My ShareCG freebies

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.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

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.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

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.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

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.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

 

"Wings doesn't do one sided geometry."

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

Poser 8 (which I use) doesn't recognize edges set to hard from Wings, at least not as far as I have seen. I would love for that functionality to be usable in Poser.

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?

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

"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.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

If I use the hole material in Wings on parts of the mesh, Poser ignores that topology on import, so the object becomes one-sided and OpenGL ignores the backsides of the polygons facing away from the camera.

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

Rendered.

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).

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

awesome, it worked! you learn something new everyday... Thanks for that tidbit, Joepublic.

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?

So what is the point of making an invisible "hole" polygon?

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

I would suggest photo references generally so you do not have to work from memory/good weather if you are going for a realistinc look.  If, however, you are going for the "feel" of it, then memory might be better.

Quote - 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.

If this implies a dangerous location or suspicious people, I would skip the camera. :-/

cgtextures probably has photos already.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

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

Poser Debut came after Poser 8...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Wisdom of bagginsbill:

"Oh - the manual says that? I have never read the manual - this must be why."
“I could buy better software, but then I'd have to be an artist and what's the point of that?"
"The [R'osity Forum Search] 'Default' label should actually say 'Don't Find What I'm Looking For'".
bagginsbill's Free Stuff... https://web.archive.org/web/20201010171535/https://sites.google.com/site/bagginsbill/Home

"So what is the point of making an invisible "hole" polygon?"

because you can. Kinda like what is the point of making a model of a sarcophagus with an erection modeled into it. Har-Har!

Sorry, couldn't resist ;)... seriously though. I'm sure somebody with a little imagination could find some use for it.

Kinda like, the ability to create a lattice in seconds using the useless hole material and the bridge function fer instance.

Waitaminute, now my smart-ass dial is really starting to wander... did this guy that is always going on about CGSociety this and that actually just ask what the use of a hole in geometry is! Guffaw!

Edit- apologies I'm beginning to fall over the troll side of the fence, getting my coat.

Quote - I would suggest photo references generally so you do not have to work from memory/good weather if you are going for a realistinc look.  If, however, you are going for the "feel" of it, then memory might be better.

Quote - 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.

If this implies a dangerous location or suspicious people, I would skip the camera. :-/

No camera, and I wouldn't want to stop long enough to take a picture.  The area used to be summer homes on a lake where people from northern Illinois, known locally as FISH or FIBs used to come.  Not that having money made them any better, they just recreated Chicago on a smaller scale.  Just one of the drawbacks of living that close to Chicago.  Now, if you see someone there, they're probably locals, and probably not in their right mind.  What they're using to have a state of altered perception of reality is what scares me.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

Quote - Kinda like, the ability to create a lattice in seconds using the useless hole material and the bridge function fer instance.

Maybe what you're calling a hole material is what I've been calling a transparent material.  Polygons can also be made hidden while working on other parts of a surface.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

When I gives up, I gives up completely.  Still needs the ramp, garden tractor shed, ya know. 

Or maybe not.  Got the corrugated, still have to see how that works out.

Doric.

Edit to add, also needs hinges, lock, and whatever else I decide should go on the doors.

D.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

Your monitor must be cranked up high.  Black color on your monitor should actually be black, not gray.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

I have the contrast set down on them all because my bad eye doesn't like bright light.  It especially doesn't like spectral, that really drives me buggy.  Like I said, getting old ain't worth the price.

Oh, yeah.  I crank the light back to somewhere around 60%, I'm more of a cloudy day guy.

But I stumbled on this.  Wasn't aware Wings 1.5 was out, but haven't checked in a while either.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5z7tGZEmFM

If this works like it seems to, Terragen height fields would be just delicious.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

Did you mean the  background black?  That's the result of converting a .png to .jpg in Irfanview, background set to black there.  but I'll check to see how it looks on the laptop, I don't use that so any settings are still factory.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

Just in general, anything colored black in your video adapter's RAM should display as black on your screen.  As in no light coming from that pixel.

If your screen brightness is cranked up, and you think everything is fine to look at.  Then you're turning down the lighting of your scenes to balance the high brightness setting of your screen.

It may be better for your eyes to set the screen brightness to normal and then use a brighter light for your scene.

If your eyes are still bothered by this, see if wearing sunglasses helps.  Also, close any window blinds/curtains near your screen so you aren't cranking up the brightness to see through any window reflections.  And point any lamps away from your screen.

This will cut down on further eye strain.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

Just set this monitor back to factory settings, didn't really make much fifference. 

But, the house is dark, very dark and that's how I like it now.  Shades are drawn, drapes closed, high bookcases in front of the front windows. 

After resetting, black is still black, gray is a little lighter, I had the brightness down a little, didn't look to see what it reset to yet. 

I render at full screen,1980 X 1040 or whatever it is.  That's where Irfanview is worth it's weight, the full screen viewing that gets rid of the bright bars a top and bottom doesn't interfere with the eye.  Tried my polaroids, that doesn't work unless your head in attached at the 90 degree z rotation. Photogray only works when the light is enough to activate it, they don't darken indoors.

And maybe I just like a little less light in my renders than most.   I like moonlight scenes, but the way the eye would see them, not as a camera could be forced. 

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

Set your video adapter to gamma 1.0.  Then adjust it to 1.4 - 1.8 if your eyes can handle it.

Otherwise, people have to editor your images to see them.  Kind of a pain.  If you are concerned about how coragated roofing (or whatever) looks in the dark, we should be able to see it also without reconfiguring stuff on our end.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

Shawn, the "hole" material is how it is designated in Wings... It's purpose is/was to assign which faces will not be included during export. Later versions of Wings have changed this a little I think (I use version 99.53). Also, if you were to import, say, a one sided square into Wings the "blank" side of the poly is colored by this material rather than behaving as it does in poser as transparent. End result, you can see the object from the transparent side. I imagine this is what you mean also when you say transparent material.

You're a Hexagon user, how do feel about the latest free version? I had read that there were some serious stability issues but I had to test it for myself... A crash occuring within 15 minutes of starting it up was all the proof I needed. I've heard from some Hex users on the forum here that they really don't have problems with it and that perhaps it's a Mac build issue ( I'm a Mac user). I have Carrara 8.1 pro and think it's pretty solid, unfortunately I don't use it nearly as much as I should considering the investment.

Also have Carrara 5 pro, got it free through 3D world magazine cover disc ages ago.

Quote - Shawn, the "hole" material is how it is designated in Wings... It's purpose is/was to assign which faces will not be included during export. Later versions of Wings have changed this a little I think (I use version 99.53). Also, if you were to import, say, a one sided square into Wings the "blank" side of the poly is colored by this material rather than behaving as it does in poser as transparent. End result, you can see the object from the transparent side. I imagine this is what you mean also when you say transparent material.

Ok.  Hiding is what I'm used to it being called.  Most modeling apps I've used let you select parts of a mesh (or select meshes in a group of meshes) to hide so they are not exported to OBJ.  I do this all the time.  Some apps use material name to select what to hide/show depending on what polygons have such material assigned.  I used Wings3D when it was version .8 or .9, but didn't understand the GUI all that much.  Reminded me too much of 3DCrafter's GUI.

Quote - You're a Hexagon user, how do feel about the latest free version?

I love Hexagon 1.21.  That was the last bug-free version before DAZ3D took it over.

Quote - I had read that there were some serious stability issues but I had to test it for myself... A crash occuring within 15 minutes of starting it up was all the proof I needed. I've heard from some Hex users on the forum here that they really don't have problems with it and that perhaps it's a Mac build issue ( I'm a Mac user).

Hexagon 2.0 was very buggy and later versions still are.  Some people don't mind the crashing, and will state how all software crashes as their excuse.  3D-Coat does a much better job of sculpting and painting/texturing than Hexagon 2.x ever could, and it doesn't crash on me ever.

Quote - I have Carrara 8.1 pro and think it's pretty solid, unfortunately I don't use it nearly as much as I should considering the investment.

I stopped with Carrara 5.1 Pro because it's stable and didn't have DAZ3D code creeping into it.  I tried 6 and 7, but only have 5.1 installed.  It is the perfect OBJ exporter/converter.  Carrara in general is dog slow at rendering.  Almost as slow as Bryce in GI rendering.

Vue, on the other hand, is much faster at rendering than Carrara.  Vue 9.5 was the last good version before bugs totally ruined it though.  Bugs have gotten worse from Vue 10 to 10.5 to 11.  Quality of workmanship or craftsmanship (whatever you call it) does not exist at e-on software.  Some users swear by it, and say Vue 11 is the bees knees, but in the same breath they will also say that all software is buggy and that no software is perfect.  These are people using current computer hardware and OSs, that Vue was written for, saying this nonsense.  Vue 9.5 Infinite does not crash on my system.  I'm doing a quick Poser walk cycle in it now of V3.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

Quote - I used Wings3D when it was version .8 or .9, but didn't understand the GUI all that much.  

I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, but I think the Wings UI is its best feature, I wish more apps were designed that way. Everything is in the right-click context menus (with advanced options if you want them), so it only offers you tools appropriate to your current selection, everything else is hidden from view, no clutter, no confusion. 

And if context menus are a bit slow for certain tasks, assigning a keyboard shortcut in Wings couldn't be easier.

"I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, but I think the Wings UI is its best feature, I wish more apps were designed that way. Everything is in the right-click context menus (with advanced options if you want them), so it only offers you tools appropriate to your current selection, everything else is hidden from view, no clutter, no confusion"

 

Couldn't agree more ! I hate alien spaceship UI's or those that expect you to memorize thousands of cryptic shortcuts and being a speed typist.

I'm using 1.4.1 with the ManifoldLab plugin so I can do booleans and other useful stuff.

"Hole" and hiding vertices are two different things, btw.

If you assign "hole" to a polygon, it is gone. (If it was a single n-gon, you can "un-hole" it again by right clicking on an adjacent polygon.)

A hole will not be exported so you get a truly one-sided/hollowed out object in Poser.

Hiding vertices is only temporary to get them out of the way if they clutter your viewport. They will be automatically un-hidden during export.

This better?

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

Yes.  You're getting warmer.

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

Quote - "Hole" and hiding vertices are two different things, btw. If you assign "hole" to a polygon, it is gone. (If it was a single n-gon, you can "un-hole" it again by right clicking on an adjacent polygon.)

A hole will not be exported so you get a truly one-sided/hollowed out object in Poser.

Hiding vertices is only temporary to get them out of the way if they clutter your viewport. They will be automatically un-hidden during export.

So is Wings3D one of those apps where if I ask six users what HOLE is for, I'll get six different answers?

www.youtube.com/user/ShawnDriscollCG

Quote - So is Wings3D one of those apps where if I ask six users what HOLE is for, I'll get six different answers?

Why woud it be any different?

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

Two things:

Quote - But, the house is dark, very dark and that's how I like it now.  Shades are drawn, drapes closed, high bookcases in front of the front windows.

Bold mine.  Having worked security as long as I did, we were responsible for (among other things) building evacuation drills.  Unless you have several doors leading to the yard, my concern is if something goes wrong and you are trapped inside.  It is your house, but you are one of us, so . . . just saying.  In Alaska, we get a lot of sun in the summer, so many people stick aluminum foil to the windows to keep the light out - dark trash bags can melt if the house is heavily insulated and not vented properly, as a neighbor found out.  :)

2)  What is that thing connecting the tall pole to the roof?  Even if I could see it better, I probably still would not know that it was.

After 35 years and more in the same house, I can get around in the dark pretty well.  If I had to get out, lots of things to throw through windows.

2: Unless you mean the shadow to the back, the light pole just sticks through the roof.  3 lights in the scene, one in the yard light, one infinite to act as the moon, one inside. nothing else holding it to the roof. click image for bigger.

Doric.

The "I" in Doric is Silent.

 

The shadow of the light on the pole made it look like a solid object. I forgot we can click to enlarge.  :p