DynDOLOD 3.00 Alpha 180

[sheson]

7 hours ago, PRieST said:

Oh, ok, it's because of the naming. Now that I know that...this should be something I need to consider for the other 'textures not match' messages :/

I'll see if I can even further decimate the model myself. But wouldn't this one not ok for level 1 and a more optimized version for level 2 - and if I am correct renaming the mesh to *_lod_1.nif and *_lod_2.nif would than apply it correspondingly?

I thought the new version only changed the NiTriShapes to BSTriShapes - will use the new version now.

The main performance improvement of LOD is reducing draw calls by combining lots of different object into supershapes sharing textures on the atlas. This only works if the UV is not titled for the actual LOD texture that is being used in the end. In case of this LOD model and the 3 textures it uses, it is always between 0.0 to 1.0.
LODGen will try to REUV/optimize on the fly but not sure how well it works in this case.
Reducing vertices/triangle count comes secondary.

One non actual LOD model here or there will not be noticeable, but more an more mods use full models or non actual LOD models it these things can add up, also prolonging generation time.

If you are actually using Blender or 3DMax to do things, look into Simplygon, it can tile the UV on top of decimating triangles.

[PRieST]

27 minutes ago, sheson said:

If you are actually using Blender or 3DMax to do things, look into Simplygon, it can tile the UV on top of decimating triangles.

I was already working with Simplygon via Blender, but haven't recognized the UV tiling feature.

Will take a look, thank you.

btw: Yep, renaming the BSTriShapes solved the issue as you said.

Edited March 27 by PRieST

[PRieST]

On 3/27/2024 at 7:09 PM, PRieST said:

I was already working with Simplygon via Blender, but haven't recognized the UV tiling feature.

Will take a look, thank you.

btw: Yep, renaming the BSTriShapes solved the issue as you said.

@sheson
Did what you suggested with Simplygon and the UV stuff. This is now the result of the same *32*.bto file (it's using textures from the atlas now as supposed to be).
The mesh itself is a little bit broken, but for the map it's absolutely fine:

vs. the old model:


Just wanted to give you/all other people here the info.
Of course best practice would be to reduce the overall polycount next, because you won't need all the little structures for the LOD-model at all - but I haven't worked on that, yet.

Edited March 29 by PRieST

[DoubleYou]

31 minutes ago, PRieST said:

@sheson
Did what you suggested with Simplygon and the UV stuff. This is now the result of the same *32*.bto file (it's using textures from the atlas now as supposed to be).
The mesh itself is a little bit broken, but for the map it's absolutely fine:

vs. the old model:


Just wanted to give you/all other people here the info.
Of course best practice would be to reduce the overall polycount next, because you won't need all the little structures for the LOD-model at all - but I haven't worked on that, yet.

Of note, Simplygon will no longer offer its free tier after March 31st.

[z929669]

58 minutes ago, DoubleYou said:

Of note, Simplygon will no longer offer its free tier after March 31st.

There's no clear way to get said "free" tier now that I can see

https://techraptor.net/gaming/news/simplygon-free-tier-abolished

[PRieST]

1 hour ago, DoubleYou said:

Of note, Simplygon will no longer offer its free tier after March 31st.

35k/year...holy... that's kind of a statement...

OK I guess that's it then. Glad I just finished this and a few other things earlier.

[User77111]

Logs: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Av1dDuTYEuYRgcpG0GjoBXG5bQVTuQ?e=Bru3fR

After updating DynDOLOD, all tree LOD in skyrim 3d trees LOD is very thin.

LOD:

Tree Model:

Console of tree:

[sheson]

46 minutes ago, User77111 said:

Logs: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Av1dDuTYEuYRgcpG0GjoBXG5bQVTuQ?e=Bru3fR

After updating DynDOLOD, all tree LOD in skyrim 3d trees LOD is very thin.

LOD:

Tree Model:

Console of tree:

You seem to have customized 3D tree LOD models with a higher alpha threshold then the ones from Skyrim3DTrees and Plants 3dLOD Resources 5.0.1.
Test with the original 3D tree LOD models that typically have a threshold of 128. 

[User77111]

50 minutes ago, sheson said:

You seem to have customized 3D tree LOD models with a higher alpha threshold then the ones from Skyrim3DTrees and Plants 3dLOD Resources 5.0.1.
Test with the original 3D tree LOD models that typically have a threshold of 128. 

It's just slightly better with the normal ones. Not as good as the custom ones I made. Is it possible to disable or adjust this automatic alpha threshold that was added?

Edited March 30 by User77111

[z929669]

9 minutes ago, User77111 said:

It is better with the normal ones. Not as good as the custom ones I made. Is it possible to disable or adjust this automatic alpha threshold that was added?

Did you make your own 3D models for this? If so, set NiAlphaProperty of the branches to 128. This will keep all of your other changes without messing up the alpha-to-coverage problem in LOD.

If you also modified the base models to your own custom NiAlphaProperty, then just leave those as you like.

[User77111]

12 minutes ago, z929669 said:

Did you make your own 3D models for this? If so, set NiAlphaProperty of the branches to 128. This will keep all of your other changes without messing up the alpha-to-coverage problem in LOD.

If you also modified the base models to your own custom NiAlphaProperty, then just leave those as you like.

I did not make my own custom models, I just edited the models. I edited the NiAlphaProperty of the leafs for each of the trees to make them perfectly match the normal models.

 

Do I need to add an alpha property to the branches and set it to 128 for DynDOLOD not to touch the branches?

Edited March 30 by User77111

[sheson]

50 minutes ago, User77111 said:

It's just slightly better with the normal ones. Not as good as the custom ones I made. Is it possible to disable or adjust this automatic alpha threshold that was added?

Either the normal ones are better or the custom ones you made are good. However you reported the custom one are too thin. How can they be good and too thin at the same time?

Not sure what "automatic alpha threshold that was added" is supposed to be. What changelog entry are you referring to?

29 minutes ago, User77111 said:

I did not make my own custom models, I just edited the models. I edited the NiAlphaProperty of the leafs for each of the trees to make them perfectly match the normal models.

Changing models from the original ones means they are now custom. Only you have them. Without them I can not test.

[z929669]

8 minutes ago, User77111 said:

I did not make my own custom models, I just edited the models. I edited the NiAlphaProperty of the leafs for each of the trees to make them perfectly match the normal models.

 

Do I need to add an alpha property to the branches and set it to 128 for DynDOLOD not to touch the branches?

But they don't perfectly match the full models. This is the problem you reported. You cannot compare far away trees to near ones. Only the transition difference matters, and that will be best if the LOD models have the same NiAlphaProperty as the full ones (unless you create your own optimized crowns that are not identical to the full ones).

This isn't a DynDOLOD problem. It's a problem of the LOD models not being a good match to the full models anymore.

[User77111]

24 minutes ago, z929669 said:

This isn't a DynDOLOD problem. It's a problem of the LOD models not being a good match to the full models anymore.

I said previously that I updated DynDOLOD, then the trees became too thin when using custom models. They are still too thin without the custom models. I'm not asking to fix a problem, just asking for the option to disable a feature added in later versions of DynDOLOD that are making custom models not work like they used to. If that is possible.

 

I also do not understand what that feature is.

 

I attached the custom 3d Tress models. I used these on DynDOLOD alpha v159. I have that version backed up too if you needed it.

LOD Gen.zip

[sheson]

40 minutes ago, User77111 said:

I said previously that I updated DynDOLOD, then the trees became too thin when using custom models. They are still too thin without the custom models. I'm not asking to fix a problem, just asking for the option to disable a feature added in later versions of DynDOLOD that are making custom models not work like they used to. If that is possible.

 

I also do not understand what that feature is.

 

I attached the custom 3d Tress models. I used these on DynDOLOD alpha v159. I have that version backed up too if you needed it.

LOD Gen.zip 1.04 MB · 1 download

If the original LOD models are already too thin, then the alpha threshold should be decreased to make them appear thicker. Increasing the alpha threshold makes them thinner.

This is with the original 3D tree LOD model. The thickness looks identical. Left is Alpha-167, right is Alpha-169.

This is with the custom 3D tree LOD model. As expected they seem to be thinner because the alpha threshold is higher. The thickness looks identical. Left is Alpha-167, right is Alpha-169.

Maybe you changed the LOD textures somehow?