DaSquade

Simply renaming won't help afaik. You need to rename it and convert it. So transp_ca.tga -> convert -> transp_ca.paa (in case you simply renamed teh original transp.paa into transp_ca.paa). Although i'm not even sure if it mathers....it more depends what kind of 'codes' you used to convert the original tga. If you add the _ca before converting, you normally don't have to tell what kind of codes it best uses as the prefix tells the convertor what is best used. In case that doesn't fix it...you might want to previde your texture so we can check the alpha's and convert it for you etc.

Well beside some overall dirt/grease i do'nt spot much change imho. The floor has improved a lot imho and isn't overdone (although hard to tell from size pic). You haven't answered my (our) question though if you used repeated/tile texturing for the floor and walls, but since i and others noticed repeated patterns i guess you used tiles to texture it. Not that is a bad think, but it limites you extremely so you can't add extra 'real' ambient occlusion effect or specific corner related damge/grease. I once did an experiment on a rather large traffic controle tower where i used tiles as base and tried to add ambient and other effects on new faces and blend them in with alphas. Sadly that didn't worked to well as shadows didn't effect the new alpha faces...BUT i might have not experimented with it alot (meaning: materials and alpha order). Maybe you play around with it....if you find it is worth it. Imho your 'small' building has enough atmosphere, so it wouldn't be worth it. Again, no need to have one great looking building if the rest 'sucks'. The only think that still lacks is a good dirt/greas boarder where the building meats the ground and some real damage to the mozaik. Like said, all other individual or geo specific effect can't be done due to the mapping as you know (but see my fix..if it works). Conclusion: nothing new that i and other said (repeated and confirmed ).

The building imho (not an expert on wear/tear texturing though) looks good enough. Plaintiff1 is correct though that ambient occlusion could add more realisme and envirement fitting to the full picture. You  did a nice job with the paint age-ing but some additional dirt etc could be added to ground level and corners. Might want to check my dirt tutorial if it helps in some way. What atm sticks out a bit is the 'new' look of the tile/brick work on the balcony (the horizontal pattern). It could use some fallen off or damaged bricks maybe, so the 'nice' build mozaik pattern gets broken... Maybe also some additionally 'rain/dust' long vertical marks could help that are starting from the balconys and under the windows. In the end, one can quickly over do it and go past what it realisticly would look like  . As long all buildings (of same age etc) share the same type of decay, one can't go wrong i guess. EDIT: offcourse it all depends a bit on how 'individually' you mapped your model. As sometimes it isn't possible to add effects as it will look unrealistic due to the 'tiling' or multiple use of the same texture on other parts of the building. -> Like for example the roof floor. I suppose you decided to make that of a small tileable texture? If not, again some dirt/dust would be nice around the balcony and building boarders. Reply on your post after i posted: Well, i'm bad at explaining, but i suppose we bought mean, effects on sureface by time/weather etc. Some decent 3d programs can bake (imho a bit fake) ambient occlusion maps witch are based on calculation of where geo 'traps' dust/dirt over periode of time. It can be selfmade in photshop though. As long you keep your structure and realistic placements in mind. Like ground corners and other corners exposed to the elements are good ambient occlusion placements. Stuff like paint damage, 'open' corners (like the corners on the the side of a building) witch will also have some sort of damage to the elements are not directly part of ambient occlusion imho.

@Panda[PL]: I'm aware, or at least been told about your M32, that you did the holes. All all my previous models i always have modeled them, but somehow i decided to keep simulate them in the texture. I quickly checked it with alpha's, but sadly it would require lost of fixes to cover clipping/uncovered stuff. So only a full 3d mesh would look good but not sure if the extra polycount is worth it. A rough count i suppose it will require +1k-2k...not sure if it is all worth it .

Little WIP of my latest model: MILKOR MGL (M32). *O2 model/render pre-unwrapping *Modo import after unwrapping and texturing Model was reduced in Modo (so ignore the info on the 'poster': Faces: 4427 (tri/poly combo) - 8831 (tris only) Points: 5095 *Still lacks decent wear & tear. Normal and spec maps also needs serious tweaking.

I suppose Mehman is correct. Alpha's + mipmapping = hairpullers! Wild guess but maybe you need to use a 'simpler' (less alpha) texture in your next lods so it does blend in more. Or maybe overlapping models, so the first lod (field) merges with the second lod (field behind it). PS: As for good lod spotting you can always add a face with a color in your model. So for each LOD you make a different color.

Maybe i'm completly wrong (in the end i have no map-building experience) but isn't this to do with the 'clutter' and the cfg of your map defines the clutter? So maybe the lod distance or any other related settings can be fixed there. Since you mentioned your model LOD didn't responded. PS: Offtopic but i posted a few suggestions regarding your palmtree model on the armaholic site.

Looks like a very nice clean model . Maybe some unneeded edges (marked in red). Also maybe have the inner part of the tires in one face although polycount if low enough to keep it like it is. PS: Maybe the back has an unneeded edge aswell (the edge defining the numberplate area). I would keep the numberplate geo, but work to the corners of the chasis. I don't see it contains any extra 3D. Same for the door, although i could be wrong.

An error message isn't a advertisment you ignore...it often explains what is wrong. So...if you could post the exact error line, we can help more . Wild guess: It says one or more faces contains more then 4 vertexes (can't remember the exact error code). If so, you need to make sure all faces don't have more then 4 vertexes (so a poly). Often this happens with end-caps of cilinder or if you use the remove edge tool to reduce your model. Quick fix is to simply trianglize your model...if you original program has the feature. But again, feel free to post the real error you encounter...

Nice to hear the Masada is getting a second revive. It is one of those gun that would be nice to have ingame. Good luck. I suppose you are aware i made an Eotech 553? Imho it would fit the Masada very well. Check with Scuba in case you want it... PS: No need to tell, but fix the lightning please (but i suppose you didn't do it untill it is unwrapped).

Yup, but i mean, in your original post you said so i assume you mean have multiple (in your case 4) ShadowVolume lods. But afaik, it is only possible to use values 0.00 and 10.00 where last should best should contain simple face (so no volumes). So i wonder what shadowvolume resolution numbers one can use  . A few days ago i tried lod 16.00 as my res lod 16.00 changed pretty must so i wanted to have a new shadowvolume that would fit the res geo more. But apperently it isn't 'linked' to the same numbers. Understand? Beside afaik i haven't seen any model that uses more then 2 volume lods (0.00 and 10.00 only). Wild guess here, but isn't this bug more or less related to aircrafts only? I remember Gnat (or someone else) having the same problem....on the ground and until a certain height the shadow worked fine though.

This is a more accurate 'guide': http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Oxygen_2_-_Manual Go to point 13.3.... @Rock: hm for me inverted models causes strange shadows...maybe this is (only) true on non complex objects? If time allows i will recheck it though. As sometimes (mostly on smooth stuff like cilinders) the clipping shadows can be nasty and hard to fix (downscaling often helps). @DM: Can you explain me please how this is done? I mean afaik one can only use 2 shadowvolume lods, namely 0.00 and 10.00. So i wonder how you can make more? Imho shadows are very important and i personally like good and accurate shadows but that is often hard if you want or need to keep it pretty low in triscount. So shadowLODS that more or less go hand in hand with the res lods would be something i would like to learn how to implant. If the mythes are correct, polycount isn't a real issue...as sections and textures are more of an performence impact for the hardware. So a smooth shadow translating Lod system would be interesting to make.

If not mistaken, it looks fake because the normal/spec and maybe AO (if it has) haven't been edited aswell. Again if not mistaken, this can't be done (custom, only by replacement). On a side note, watch the thin ice you are walking (refurring to re-open some old topics).

Maybe, but in most cases that is covered by good res lods. Meaning, by the time you get into problems with seperated objects, the seperated object itself should already be replaced by a solid 'lower and less detailed' poly object. It is always a heart breaking process, but since it is a game object and not an 3d render object, it needs to perform....so it needs to be as optimized (often = as low as possible be it poly or textures). The higher the ploycount of your object, the less room it gives to leave it unoptimized. Sad but true i think.

, but far from optimized  .My 50cent input of what i could see...if you continue fixing according to this principle (of low poly game modeling), the model will have way less poly (-15%?). Same geo so no loss of visual quality... Golden rule (at least what i do): -Cilinders: 32-16-8-4 segments as it is a piece of cake to replace them (edge remove tool in modo for example). Very important for lod reducing. -Keep an overall equal level of detail (wheels segements versus smaller detail..smoothness). Sometimes hard... PS: with what program you work? It hurts my eyes to see all end-caps of the cilinders in that shape .

I don't know much about the shape of the AH64(A), but you might want to watch out with the edge tool. It is a nice powerfull tool, but: -Imho you're overdoing yourself and the model (like said, don't know its real shape). Looks like a lot of edges are pointless or just not that important. -Edge loops can mess up your 'clean' model. Anyway, just saying .

I don't want to troll, but i agree with MehMan. ArmA2 can in some way be considered as the 3th 'version' of its kind, i think after all these years it is about time to see some change in that department (where other games many years ago had it right or better). Not sure if the 'new-generation' game still stands, but the game still lacks features of the previous generation of games imho. As for the: : Been there, done that...personally 50x50km or even 100x100km maps are big enough for me. I consider 2 maps better then 1 big ass one, even if it made in the same style... : It might be part of the worlds war plan and a nice way to interact, but honestly that is the last time on my mind. Maybe it involves a torture system, in the real world one would get much info . : Got a list? Just asking.Anyway, in the end it was just a question like any other question what or what we can't expect. If it is still too urly to reveal, then so be it .

Tutorial: How the create realistic mud overlays on objects (samples included). First of all you needs to know what type of mud you want to create as there are different types of mud effects, some examples: *Dry sand mud effects. *Mix of dry sand mud and wet/fresh mud effects. *Heavy offroad mud effects. My attempt was creating type 2. Before we start it is best to collect some usefull picture samples, be it from the net or pictures you have taken yourself. Often it doesn't require much specific photos, but it is best to find some that already fit the end result (color and pattern wise). After adjusting (scalling, copy/paste, patching, cloning) the samples so it cover the object and you placed each sample on an individual layer, we can start working on making mud effects. Hide all samples and bring one up. It might be best to start working with the softest sample (dry mud type) as often that will cover the most especially on the outsides. Add a 'mask layer' on the sample and make sure it has a black brackground. This will hide the sample. Now use pattern brush and use white color to paint in the mask layer. Use the brush options 'shape dynamic', 'scattering' and 'texture' to create non-repeated patterns. Use inverted color (black) to soften certain unwanted patterns. Often playing around with the 'burn' and 'blur' tool creates extra dynamics in the pattern. Once you have a base, do the same with your next sample and build it slightly up. Play around with the sample layer opacity/brightness and contract or even add an color overlay effect if needed. Use a very thin pencil (1px/sharp) with the 'scattering' effect to create mud splashes. The original: After a good 15 minutes playing: So far my poor attempt of a tutorial. See Mud PSD example who it was done (it was done pretty fast and noticed there are some flows in it....but you get the idea). Feel free to add your technics or share your comments. We can all learn of it. EDIT: Second attempt after some tips of Jenny. Continued on the first attempt, but this time i use 'splatter' samples for the mask layer. MUD version2 PSD.

Not really a biki fan here . Well a quickly checked with one of the mods to check how this best would be done: inside the current "ARMA : O2 MODELLING" section or maybe a new section...Will see what turns up.

I understand...all my previous QUICK attempts looked like your monkey doedoes i guess. Thing is, mud doesn't come out of a can (brush)..it take some effort. Anyway, hope it helps you a bit. Feel free to use what can be used. *Bit offtopic: Been thinking about it long time and it just came back when chatting to Godkiller. Wouldn't it be an idea to seperate these small tutorials and give them their own sticked position in this sub-forum? I would be up for it to make some other small tutorials, be it good or not, as long we can all learn out of it. It would be a nice place to fits in others simular attempts (in same form...end result + PSD to be shared). Just a thought...not that the BIS forum needs to turn into a online tutorial site.

Recently i upgraded to ArmA 1.14 to be able to play with some friends again. Bulldozer worked fine before the upgrade... Now i check my bulldozer and i'm receiving errors and a bulldozer crash. At bulldozer launch i get the first error: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">no entry 'bin\config.bin/CfgDifficulties/Regular/Flags.VonID' When i enter the pop-up a new one appears: <table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">Shaders not valid (mismatch of exe and data?) When i enter that one, bulldozer launch crashes and exits. Any idea?

Sorry about late reply, reinstalling the latest tools fixed it. Thanks for the help.

As i still have to learn a lot when it comes to photo-realistic texturing i decided to quickly give it a shot. I must agree mud texturing is not that easy (for me) like said due to the fact it is very organic but on the other side it needs some sort of realitic pattern. Offcourse there are different types of mud: clean dry sad/dust particals (witch will give a nice flat pattern), mixed mud, heavy offroad wet and dry mud rests etc etc... Anyway, my quick attempt (15min playing aroudn in photoshop on a simple photo of a car side profile): The psd, feel free to use: Muddy car tutorial PSD As you can see i just took some random samples of the net and worked with layer masks. -Started of with giving the mask layer a full black color so the sample texture is 'hidden'. Then i slowly worked with soft and hard brushes (white color) on the mask so it becomes visible again. -Play around with the contrast and brightness (of the layer mask) and layer opacity (of the sample texture). -If needed change/adjust the sample texutre (light or dark brown values) so you get the effect of dry or wet mud. Some for the next few samples... A simple 1pixel/sharp brush (default) is used to give it the 'mud spays' on it. Same principle as you would use for making scratches. Overall, for the quick test it turned out pretty good imho. At least it was the effect i was trying to make (mix of wet and dry mud). Like asways, the longer and more patience you work the better effect you will get. Something i was wondering though, but guess it could be found on the net, is how to past a black/white 'relief' picture into a layer mask. It didn't worked here, as some textures can easly be use as start mask. Anyway, hope it helps a bit or at least give you an idea who i did it. But i'm sure there are plenty other ways to do it, if not better ways .

I'm not texture artist and i don't have directly something i can share in psd form, but for mud/rust etc...Imho you get the fastest result if you google for a nice 'even' mud/rust picture, you might even want to go outside and take some pictures. In photoshop apply and mask on it and work on the mask with one of the stamps or a custom stamp. Work with the inverted color to remove or soften the mud. Might want to play with several mud/rust sample pictures and play around with the layer Opacity and layer style (multiply/color burn/overlay etc...). It takes some effort to get result though and since it is 'organic' in shape it will demand some artistic talent and common sence where to apply it. This has more or less been discussed some time ago. Fact is, afaik, the engine (not only arma's engine but all 3d render engines) in the end calculate and work with vertexes and work with triangle polys. Personally i rather work with quad polys as long as possible as it looks cleaner and easier to work with the model. Fact is like you are aware of, it is best to manually already prepare and custom convert some quad polys into tris so the 'split' is in the correct or best possible diagolan. You can do it one by one, witch is often the best way as mirrored faces tend to split the wrong way. As for what faces are best to convert, you can check the faces by using the 'check faces' option/tool in O2. If the model still contains non-planar faces and non-linear mapping 'bugs', those are the one that still need attention.

Ok fair enough. I let myself carry away i admite... Anyway, i understand but somehow we all know there is very small time between now and the release date (if the Q4 2008 still stand, i don't follow it that much) so there is no need to expect miricles. Even for a patch i think this will be a big 'fix'. But true...time will tell.