GP4 Track Editing - new new thread
Posted by markko
for numbers, they won't appear if you hide sectors direction too.
Lo2k Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> for numbers, they won't appear if you hide sectors
> direction too.
it works now,thanx
My GPGSL Career
-------------------------------------------------------
> for numbers, they won't appear if you hide sectors
> direction too.
it works now,thanx
My GPGSL Career
Has anyone successfully managed to edit the .cfp file ? (Crowd Flash Positions)
Builder crashes when i try to edit it.
thx
"EDIT"
My bad...got it working now, is it possible to have the cfp and gp4 loaded together so I can position them accurately ?
I actually don't fancy doing this' there's 733 points to move manually :p , I think it would be easier to use a flag anim texture instead.
f1virtual
r@m
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/06/2010 11:51AM by spoodge.
Builder crashes when i try to edit it.
thx
"EDIT"
My bad...got it working now, is it possible to have the cfp and gp4 loaded together so I can position them accurately ?
I actually don't fancy doing this' there's 733 points to move manually :p , I think it would be easier to use a flag anim texture instead.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/06/2010 11:51AM by spoodge.
Laurent, when setting the flag value to 64, so the object won't reflect in wet conditions, the xyz-position gets affected. See below.
When setting the flag value back to zero, the xyz-position doesn't change back to the original positions. Any workable solution for it? I don't want to start all over again.
Thanks
My Grand Prix 4 Files
I'm a total dick. How many people can say that?
When setting the flag value back to zero, the xyz-position doesn't change back to the original positions. Any workable solution for it? I don't want to start all over again.
Thanks
Hmm, I can only see one reason for this : you imported mesh just before and didn't saved the track so far, thus coordiantes are rounded when you change any value (either flag value or anything else, first change will do it).
In that case, I would suggest to save your track just after you imported your new meshes. Then reopen the track and make your flag changes, nothing should move anymore.
If you saved things before, then I really don't know what happens because I just made tests and setting flag to 64 doesn't change anything for my objects here.
In that case, I would suggest to save your track just after you imported your new meshes. Then reopen the track and make your flag changes, nothing should move anymore.
If you saved things before, then I really don't know what happens because I just made tests and setting flag to 64 doesn't change anything for my objects here.
Yep, it would be nice if you could send me the file because I just made a test with some just converted track from dat bank objects and I still didn't get the offset problem.
I'm investigating this weird offset now that I can see it live thanks to your files...
Anyway thanks to your report I changed default flag to 64 for all objects converted from .dat but TRACK and rails (that keep 0 default one).
PS : OK, I see from which feature everything started, it's with the introduction of object coordinates manual input.
PPS : OK, Problem fixed. I wished to release a new version though but badly I'm in the middle of some internal changes so I can't release it so soon. We have a 4 days week-end starting from tomorrow evening, I will see if and what I can do.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/11/2010 09:30PM by Lo2k.
Anyway thanks to your report I changed default flag to 64 for all objects converted from .dat but TRACK and rails (that keep 0 default one).
PS : OK, I see from which feature everything started, it's with the introduction of object coordinates manual input.
PPS : OK, Problem fixed. I wished to release a new version though but badly I'm in the middle of some internal changes so I can't release it so soon. We have a 4 days week-end starting from tomorrow evening, I will see if and what I can do.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/11/2010 09:30PM by Lo2k.
Well, I can do anything but I saw that original Monza TRACK objects had flag to 0 and the same for rails. Checking again, I can only find rails with 64 value and if TRACK have still 0 value, Monaco track have all its TRACK objects to 64...
For rails, it would be better to set them to 0 to make them auto reflected (but if you want to create REFLECTED ones yourself and thus set them to 64 too). Anyway I remind there are some troubles with auto-reflected objects if there's any slope so I will set them to 64 too. This way they won't be reflected and thus reflexions won't be wrong and at least you could quickly add fences to create REFLECTED rails if you want them. (waiting for an auto-creation integrated in the track from .dat feature).
I will set TRACK objects to 64 too.
It would be much appreciated if you (and anyone around having reports) could send me the list of your detected bugs in the incoming 2 days in order I could fix them for a possible release on sunday.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2010 06:48PM by Lo2k.
For rails, it would be better to set them to 0 to make them auto reflected (but if you want to create REFLECTED ones yourself and thus set them to 64 too). Anyway I remind there are some troubles with auto-reflected objects if there's any slope so I will set them to 64 too. This way they won't be reflected and thus reflexions won't be wrong and at least you could quickly add fences to create REFLECTED rails if you want them. (waiting for an auto-creation integrated in the track from .dat feature).
I will set TRACK objects to 64 too.
It would be much appreciated if you (and anyone around having reports) could send me the list of your detected bugs in the incoming 2 days in order I could fix them for a possible release on sunday.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2010 06:48PM by Lo2k.
Laurent, i do some bug testing tomorrow and shall report it.
My Grand Prix 4 Files
I'm a total dick. How many people can say that?
There are so many bugs ? 
I hope not because after you will give me the list, I will also have to track them down and to fix them. It could be a minute task or a several hours one.
So I hope you could send me your report today or I fear I won't have the time to fix them for this release (I already fixed some but maybe not yours yet).
I hope not because after you will give me the list, I will also have to track them down and to fix them. It could be a minute task or a several hours one.
So I hope you could send me your report today or I fear I won't have the time to fix them for this release (I already fixed some but maybe not yours yet).
Ok, here i go:
When an object has 2 parts, the faces of the first part won't get highlighted in the list when you choose for next or previous. Only the first face stays highlighted, see below:
With the second part you can't choose for 'next', it's greyed out. Only 'previous' can be chosen, but that's not logical. See below:
It has also the same problem as the first part regarding highlighting. Those problems mentioned above do also occur when objects have more than 2 parts.
When you detach multiple faces in once, i get very often this message:
It happens as example when i detach the last 8 faces of the 20 faces from an object.
As last i have a 'normals' problem, see below:
This can't be corrected by 'compute normals'. The only solution is to group it with a object close to it and do some vertice snapping.
My oppologies for the late reaction Laurent.
My Grand Prix 4 Files
I'm a total dick. How many people can say that?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/15/2010 04:47PM by Turbo Lover.
When an object has 2 parts, the faces of the first part won't get highlighted in the list when you choose for next or previous. Only the first face stays highlighted, see below:
With the second part you can't choose for 'next', it's greyed out. Only 'previous' can be chosen, but that's not logical. See below:
It has also the same problem as the first part regarding highlighting. Those problems mentioned above do also occur when objects have more than 2 parts.
When you detach multiple faces in once, i get very often this message:
It happens as example when i detach the last 8 faces of the 20 faces from an object.
As last i have a 'normals' problem, see below:
This can't be corrected by 'compute normals'. The only solution is to group it with a object close to it and do some vertice snapping.
My oppologies for the late reaction Laurent.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/15/2010 04:47PM by Turbo Lover.
Thanks for the report, better late than never
I will check all of this points and see if I can fix them for tomorrow or not. Hopefully I completed all my wip fatures so I can spend my whole day on these if needed (but 2 hours for the Monaco GP of course :p)
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/15/2010 08:01PM by Lo2k.
I will check all of this points and see if I can fix them for tomorrow or not. Hopefully I completed all my wip fatures so I can spend my whole day on these if needed (but 2 hours for the Monaco GP of course :p)
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/15/2010 08:01PM by Lo2k.
Prev and Next buttons behaviours and red edges are fixed for next version.
So I will check for 3rd trouble.
Anyhow I don't have your 4th one (weird normals), either with track from .dat or with fence editor (what seems to suggest your "rail" with a top and probably rear side).
How did you create it ?
PS : error with detaching is fixed too so only 4th point with normals remains...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/16/2010 10:57AM by Lo2k.
So I will check for 3rd trouble.
Anyhow I don't have your 4th one (weird normals), either with track from .dat or with fence editor (what seems to suggest your "rail" with a top and probably rear side).
How did you create it ?
PS : error with detaching is fixed too so only 4th point with normals remains...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/16/2010 10:57AM by Lo2k.
Thanks for the quick fixing Laurent.
About the normals problem: Firstly i created the fences with track from dat. As texture i used a fence texture. Later i created lower fences with the add fences option. As texture i used a hay texture. The new created fence object i grouped with the original object. After that i deleted the part of the original object. When i fixed the normals problem with vertice snapping, it comes back when i choose the option compute normals. I upload my track so you can see it yourself.
Here the link: [rapidshare.com]
Thanks
My Grand Prix 4 Files
I'm a total dick. How many people can say that?
About the normals problem: Firstly i created the fences with track from dat. As texture i used a fence texture. Later i created lower fences with the add fences option. As texture i used a hay texture. The new created fence object i grouped with the original object. After that i deleted the part of the original object. When i fixed the normals problem with vertice snapping, it comes back when i choose the option compute normals. I upload my track so you can see it yourself.
Here the link: [rapidshare.com]
Thanks
OK, for this one I do believe you made some mistake with the snap moves, creating null faces.
Look at faces 4,5,24 and 25, two first one use 3 times vertex 0 and 2 last ones use 3 times vertex 22.
As vertex 0 (the one on your screen) is shared amongst faces 0,4 and 5, normals are merged during computation and gives the above result.
In that case, simply delete null faces and normal computation will work again.
No fix for this one then
Look at faces 4,5,24 and 25, two first one use 3 times vertex 0 and 2 last ones use 3 times vertex 22.
As vertex 0 (the one on your screen) is shared amongst faces 0,4 and 5, normals are merged during computation and gives the above result.
In that case, simply delete null faces and normal computation will work again.
No fix for this one then
I noticed it now also, but those created null faces are created by GP4Builder due the fact that there is a fence gate generated by the dat file.
My Grand Prix 4 Files
I'm a total dick. How many people can say that?
Indeed...well, that's a good point for you
Anyway it will be harder to fix this one in time because I havn't a better solution to sort faces created from gates (that should not be created at all in theory, we agree) at the moment.
At least it only happens for fence gates and it is identified now, so it will be fast to fix it anyway by hand, waiting for a cleaner solution.
Thanks for all the reports though
This way I was able to fix most of them and even to add automatic REFLECT walls creation (with fence gate bug too thus ^^)
Anyway it will be harder to fix this one in time because I havn't a better solution to sort faces created from gates (that should not be created at all in theory, we agree) at the moment.
At least it only happens for fence gates and it is identified now, so it will be fast to fix it anyway by hand, waiting for a cleaner solution.
Thanks for all the reports though
This way I was able to fix most of them and even to add automatic REFLECT walls creation (with fence gate bug too thus ^^)
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.