godescalcus
-
Posts
755 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
10
godescalcus's Achievements
Jarl (8/12)
23
Reputation
-
Correct, no bugreport.txt was generated. That plugin is my merge of a number of new weapon and armour plugins, to save esp slots, along with their LOTD patches that add displays and tracking. I'm uploading the esp and the merge folder, so you can see the plugins included (although I think they're listed in the merged plugin description). The record mentioned in the error message is originally from Oblivion Artifacts Pack. https://mega.nz/file/BxwW1J4B#6ts2YZV1C9KpUEA23OTJFuEOrG2qqXnaVOkL_jgJX_c
-
When trying to run DynDOLOD, I now have a blocking error with an activator for a Legacy of The Dragonborn display, xEdit doesn't detect anything wrong. Could this issue originate elsewhere than the record itself? Logs: https://mega.nz/file/N94TBIRC#DJVcavPsCgkrlcfKmst6uxmgV9rycNFaIZVunRkci2I
-
I'm failing to get DynDOLOD_CRC32Gen.pas to work. I copied it to xEdit\Edit scripts, open the mod in xEdit and run the script on its tree base records. Set the origin and output folders as such: const source = 'H:\SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\Skyrim Special Edition\Data\meshes\'; output = 'C:\modding_tools\DynDOLOD\docs\trees.ultra\tools\hybrids\input\ulvenwald\'; (on a previous run I set the source to 'C:\modding_tools\DynDOLOD\docs\trees.ultra\tools\hybrids\input\ulvenwald_origin\' - which is a folder where I copied the entire set of tree meshes contained in the mod). Clearly this isn't how it's used, but I'm guessing since I can't find instructions anywhere. Searched this forum, googled, looked into documentation for the older DynDOLOD, seems like if there were instructions, they're gone now? Last night I spent 4 hours using 7zip to get the CRC32, then manually add it to hundreds of filenames, it would be great to avoid having to do that again... Also found re-uv.bat and merge.bat that could help make it quicker to process the original mesh into a static mesh, before further processing and splitting - but also can't find instructions on how to use them. Are these in older DynDOLOD files that have not been included in the most recent versions? Any way to reach?
-
This is my attempt at reducing file size (and polygon count) in Blender. Brings it down from 22000 triangles to 8000, and I reckon it shows the difference. I didn't remove triangles, instead applied the decimate modifier twice, first pass unsubdividing triangles, second pass uniting triangles with a common side and angle under 15º. Probably the second step is the destructive one? Anyways, would you say the edited crown would be acceptable for a lod? What would you consider to be the optimal compromise between limiting pop-ins, and performance? File size is still over 500Mb but since the polygon count was so drastically reduced by almost 2/3, I'm willing to suggest it's a good compromise - but I can also use this as a rule for now, check in game, and adjust...
-
I think we agree that Sniff is a jewel, and zilav is a scholar I'm feeling like starting from scratch and trying out your workflow, because even with Sniff, processing crowns and trunks separately as I did on my "learn as you go" process "might" lead to unexpected results...
-
Would it harm if I had already set the scale in the child nodes to 1 as well? Here's a sample of my crowns and trunks https://ufile.io/f/rd2uo would further tweaking be necessary - other than optimisation of the absurdly high number of vertices in the case of crowns?
-
Thanks. For trunks, I "painstakingly" removed crowns from each tree full model individually, before rendering. Considering the trunks are only meant to be used to render billboards, I didn't do any further tweaks there. For crowns, I deleted every branch pertaining to the trunk. Then I've been able to use Sniff to - convert root node from BSFLeafAnimNode to BSFadeNode - remove node BSXFlags - remove unused nodes (for good measure - no changes resulted from this step) Still trying to find a quick way to automatically remove all rigging/skinning in meshes that may have them, without going through them 1 by 1. BSFadeNode does seem to have a scale that is not 1.0 - and in some models, child nodes also. Do I need to manually scale the mesh (somehow), or is it enough to set the scale to 1 in all nodes? And perhaps I should have done this to the full mesh before splitting it into crown and trunk, to save having to edit double the amount of meshes? Regarding optimization, it seems important in this case since some crowns have over 10000 triangles, but maybe I should tackle one problem at a time... I understand that vertex manipulation requires a full fledged 3d app. Maybe it's time to start with Blender?
-
I compared my crowns with those shipped with DynDOLOD as you suggested, and there are differences you can notice on the node tree. I also didn't perform any special steps to remove animation, skin and bone data (I did remove collision meshes, if that's enough for removing collision). I've seen your instructions to remove skin, also about UV editing - and I checked a few of these meshes at random and saw their UVs were ok, so I skipped checking all of them, for the purpose of what is still just an experiment. I'm aware of the need to remove animations, I think, because you told me so years ago on discord - but I can't find the relevant instructions there, or in the manual. I'll look around. I also remember your suggestion to use a couple of "spells" on nifskope as "general good practice", but fail to recall which. One other issue is that I noticed how the original meshes have a huge number of vertices - is there a good "hack" to batch optimise them? Another of zilav's magic wands? Or does it have to be done one by one - and in such case, can Nifskope handle it? I've read the post you linked in your later answer about tree scale and noticed that 3DS Max can be used for this (optimisation, assuming that includes reducing vertex count), but considering I don't have the program (and Blender is free) - can Blender be used (productively) for the whole workflow of optimising crown meshes?
-
I made the separate trunk and crown meshes for 187 of Ulvenwald's 350 tree models (which, by my estimation, correspond to 99% of the trees referenced) and combined them with lodgen, then installed the hybrids as a new mod. Ran texgen and dyndolod and the result is (as expected) much better than before, but ran into an issue where the hybrid models seem to be more then 2x the size of the full model (adding 2 in-game screenshots to illustrate). In no moment did I manually edit anything about the meshes, simply followed instructions to produce the hybrids. Used as tree rules: Lod4=Level0; Lod8=Lod16=Billboard4; Lod32=Billboard6; VWD on; grid=FarLOD. In texgen I used texture sizes and bit density as recommended for 1440p, then ticked both Tree and HD Tree (not Rendered, since I had already built the hybrids). Do I need additional steps to make the hybrid lods match the full model in scale? Example screenshots (second screenshot taken past the first small pine, but the ruins are good for scale) I also noticed the hybrids seem to react to light differently than the full models (brighter), but I could probably live with that for now, one problem at a time Appreciate your help in getting this far, and would be happy if I could fix the issue with scale.
-
When creating trunk and crown meshes, are there any steps you recommend doing in NifSkope to "tidy things up"? Do we need to remove animations from crown meshes, or sanitize, or remove invalid stuff or any other "spell" - or does LodGEN perform all the necessary steps when combining them into hybrids? I mean, other than what you describe regarding editing UVs. In the same vein, should we do anything about trunks prior to render with texgen, like removing collision object when present, or simply remove the crown and save, since texgen only takes "snapshots" of the rendered mesh, and lodgen uses the chosen mesh template for trunks?
-
So, considering your dire warning about setting TreeFullFallBack=0, I might set it to 4 and ensure that any fallback billboards will use the 4x2 model. As a follow-up question, I noticed my billboard textures were a bit fuzzy, even for large pines... I had texgen units per pixel using the recommended for 1080p (my panel and game resolution are actually 1440p). Would it be absurd to use an even higher density, such as the 5.5 units per pixel recommended for 4k, to ensure the best possible looking LOD4 when I know for starters that most of my trees don't have hybrids? Or are your recommendations already the limit, considering the height of the tree and the closest distance at which LOD4 would be rendered? And would "oversampling" like this have a benefit in alpha channel generation for very finely cut tree models?
-
What's the default fallback for LOD4 when you set the rules to level0, for trees where there is no passthru model installed? Is there a way to force LOD4 to fallback to either 4x2 billboards, or even a full tree model, when the preferred rule is not possible due to non-existing assets?
-
I'm now a bit confused with what I may or may not have done to the tree models. I did change their textures to bring them closer to aspens ablaze autumn variety, but don't remember doing anything to the meshes - although I cracked them open to check what might have been causing leaves to look a bit blander than their textures would indicate. I don't recall saving the mesh, but then, I may have. I'll reinstall the originals, even because, although DynDOLOD did succeed in generating lods for this build, I ended up with Ulvenwald lods! Edit: I fetched at least one of the autumn aspens from an earlier version, because it looked prettier So there's probably the CRC difference, and since I hadn't gone through the hybrids yet, I overlooked checking whether there was a hybrid for that older mesh.
-
Sorry, can't help it... LOL - you CRC32'd my tampered Nature of The Wild Lands and caught me red handed, so here's my confession. I broke the mod apart to avoid adding everything, as my trees are based on Ulvenwald. So I made Nature "modular", meaning I separated tree definitions, statics, etc to one base plugin, and worldspace referneces to a set of modules containing only what I wanted to add. Added the marsh in its entirety, and the autumn birches plugin because it was all that was needed to override Ulvenwald's fall forest trees. Added Solstheim edits because they would fit into a light plugin, and for good measure... but still haven't tested it extensively. Here's a clip of my frankenstein forests So the reason you see a different CRC32 is because I had to redirect the autumn birch plugin master from the original Nature of The Wild Lands to my broken down version, but that plugin in particular contains no other edits. I did correct the birch editorIDs on the DenserFallForest plugin, which is a different matter - and seems to have been the one that fixed my problem. DynDOLOD didn't give out the assertion error this time at 6 minutes, and it's been doing its thing for 18 minutes now. Edit: DynDOLOD finished, thanks!
-
Nature of The Wild Lands is replacing the vanilla birch with its own model, changing object bounds, model filename, full name and animation data. Regarding CNAM - it increases amplitude, reduces frequency compared with vanilla. Ulvenwald does its own edits, but I have NoTWL winning aspens. Sorry about the ss but I thought it might be informative, in the context of your question. It's suspicious that your reading of the logs points to NoTWL. My build is very much Lexy's build with a few changes, and this is one of them. I know NoTWL is reported to not be the most DynDOLOD friendly tree overhaul but I thought it was just the lack of passthru models. It has such good tree models, I was even thinking about making hybrid meshes for the majority, since only a minority have them and I'm trying to run DynDOLOD with Level0 at both LOD4 and LOD8 (which is another point where I'm diverging from lexy/step). I've even been entertaining the thought of going full 3d if I did pull off the hybrids. Meanwhile, those six duplicate formids were my DenserFallForest plugin adding back the original aspen records (with models from Aspens Ablaze) as new trees and distributing them across the map, for added variety and density. I edited the formids to differentiate them from the original, as you implied. I think if I opened and saved the plugin in the CK it would have done the same thing? Some times I abuse of "blind" xEdit tampering. (edit: removed duplicate screenshot)
