SSU Development thread (4.0 to 5.0) [DEVELOPMENT HALTED DUE TIME REQUIREMENTS!]

Status
Not open for further replies.

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
37,628
Reaction score
2,345
Points
203
Location
Wolfsburg
Preferred Pronouns
Sire
Potentially silly question about the high-res mapping process: is the texture being edited to fit the uv coordinates, or is it the other way around?


Depends... what is the reference for the UV coordinates? The default textures or the high-res textures?
 

DaveS

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
9,439
Reaction score
689
Points
203
Potentially silly question about the high-res mapping process: is the texture being edited to fit the uv coordinates, or is it the other way around?
It should be the first since the mesh is pretty much finished and some areas like the vertical stabilizer is pretty hard to map to an existing texture, especially if the general shape of the mesh itself has changed. The current texture as you can imagine was made to fit a differently shaped vertical stabilizer so the it won't the new one.

---------- Post added at 08:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:48 PM ----------

Depends... what is the reference for the UV coordinates? The default textures or the high-res textures?
The problem is that both are wrong. Both were made to fit to the old incorrectly shaped vertical stabilizer so they're no invalid and have no references anymore. So a new texture is required.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
37,628
Reaction score
2,345
Points
203
Location
Wolfsburg
Preferred Pronouns
Sire
The problem is that both are wrong. Both were made to fit to the old incorrectly shaped vertical stabilizer so they're no invalid and have no references anymore. So a new texture is required.


Not at all. It just matters what is the standard. If we decide to fix the coordinates for the default, the highres has to be fixed. or the other way around.



Or we wait for a THIRD set of textures to be invalid the next time...
 

GLS

Well-known member
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,927
Reaction score
2,937
Points
188
Website
github.com
If I remember well, the default textures will be a scalled down version of the hi-res, right? So, IMO those are history.
Do the hi-res have the "correct" shape of things? If so, then the tail should be remapped and the problem solved for good. Same goes for other groups or meshes.
 

DaveS

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
9,439
Reaction score
689
Points
203
Not at all. It just matters what is the standard. If we decide to fix the coordinates for the default, the highres has to be fixed. or the other way around.
The problem is that neither fits anymore. The shape and size is wrong. If I change the coordinates, all we'll end up even with the default textures is a mangled mess that just looks wrong. The new vertical stabilizer mesh(es) shares no history with the old one(s) at all. It(they) was(were) made from scratch using a completely different technique, reusing nothing from the old mesh(es).


Our current vertical stabilizer texture dates all the way back to 2006 when preacher_mg released this add-on: [ame="https://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=2462"]STS Visual Upgrade 2.0 Beta[/ame]

---------- Post added at 09:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:41 PM ----------

If I remember well, the default textures will be a scalled down version of the hi-res, right? So, IMO those are history.
Do the hi-res have the "correct" shape of things? If so, then the tail should be remapped and the problem solved for good. Same goes for other groups or meshes.
Right now Wolf's hi-resolution photo-real needs to be updated yes to account for the changed vertical stabilizer. The current plan is to include scaled down versions as the default in the base package but offer the full resolutions as an official add-on, similar to how Orbiter itself used to do things with the planetary textures. So there would be one source for the textures, just two resolutions, one low/med and one high (AKA full). So changing things would mean just editing one source.
 

Donamy

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
6,919
Reaction score
218
Points
138
Location
Cape
I think the below screenshot from the AC3D Texture Coordinate Editor will be of help as it shows the mapping of the vertical stabilizer/Rudder-Speedbrake panels.


Doesn't fit very well does it ?
 

DaveS

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
9,439
Reaction score
689
Points
203
Doesn't fit very well does it ?
No, that's the problem being discussed. You can't expect a texture made for one mesh to fit a different one. We've been very lucky so far that our textures have held out for as long as they've done. But this was a problem coming for us the more data we got on the shuttle. And the name of the the project is "Space Shuttle Ultra", so why should the visuals be excepted from the name? The predecessor, Space Shuttle Deluxe gave us the IK for the RMS as well as usable cameras, so this is just the next step.
 

Urwumpe

Not funny anymore
Addon Developer
Donator
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
37,628
Reaction score
2,345
Points
203
Location
Wolfsburg
Preferred Pronouns
Sire
No, that's the problem being discussed. You can't expect a texture made for one mesh to fit a different one. We've been very lucky so far that our textures have held out for as long as they've done. But this was a problem coming for us the more data we got on the shuttle. And the name of the the project is "Space Shuttle Ultra", so why should the visuals be excepted from the name? The predecessor, Space Shuttle Deluxe gave us the IK for the RMS as well as usable cameras, so this is just the next step.


(I just erased a lengthy rant.)



Sorry.



Can you maybe understand some deep disappointment not about what changed, but how it got changed?
 

GLS

Well-known member
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,927
Reaction score
2,937
Points
188
Website
github.com
So I stayed up late last night (way too late) to start the keyboard mesh, and even though I only settled the dimensions* and made the first row and 1 key, all still in 2D, it already looked good to make me grin from ear to ear. :blush:
Tonight I hope to advance enough to have something to show.


*) can't find real size data, but it should be within 10% or the real one
 

Donamy

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
6,919
Reaction score
218
Points
138
Location
Cape
Which keyboard ?
 

Donamy

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
6,919
Reaction score
218
Points
138
Location
Cape
I didn't know they had issues.
 

DaveS

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
Donator
Beta Tester
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
9,439
Reaction score
689
Points
203
I didn't know they had issues.
I refer you this post by GLS:

Another thing, DaveS: did you got around to make the C2 panel? (you posted an image of a new F6 awhile back)
IMO this is not high-priority, but I'd like to get the keyboard keys to move when pressed, otherwise one has to constantly be moving the camera up to the MDU to check that the inputs are correct. If you didn't get that far ahead, I can make it myself as it is pretty much strait lines and stuff.


---------- Post added 04-05-19 at 12:28 AM ---------- Previous post was 04-04-19 at 04:29 PM ----------

GLS: Since you're doing some minor work on the VC, would this be the time to get rid of the VC lighting "cheat" (using emissive material settings) and begin using actual light sources? Or would be this considered a major rework?
 

GLS

Well-known member
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,927
Reaction score
2,937
Points
188
Website
github.com
GLS: Since you're doing some minor work on the VC, would this be the time to get rid of the VC lighting "cheat" (using emissive material settings) and begin using actual light sources? Or would be this considered a major rework?

I did that awhile back, and posted an image... but if I remember well, when looking into the PLB from the aft windows, we would hit the light limit and the lights in the PLB would go off.
That was only the "big" lights. For the panel backlights I think we'll need to play with materials and textures. So, yes that is major rework.
But that will totally be worth the effort someday as, like I said at the time, being in the shadow of the Earth with the lights off in the vc... somehow really scary. :shifty:


BTW: the new keyboard mesh is done! (somewhat expensive at 1K triangles :uhh:) Now reworking the texture as some things need change and also the font isn't correct (found a very good match).
 

GLS

Well-known member
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,927
Reaction score
2,937
Points
188
Website
github.com
So, here are the initial results:
attachment.php

attachment.php


So, it's obvious that the new keyboard is smaller than what we currently have, but comparing with the real panel C2, ours is streched vertically* (the buttons on the right keyboard aren't even square, same for the bases of the switch guards), so that explains at least part of it. :shrug:
Probably will replace the back texture with gray to "hide" the empty spaces above and below the keyboard, as fixing the panel now probably would take time.

Still animations to do and also install the other 2 keyboards.



*) or the MDUs have the wrong size
 

Attachments

  • kb1.PNG
    kb1.PNG
    446.2 KB · Views: 226
  • kb2.PNG
    kb2.PNG
    38.8 KB · Views: 228

GLS

Well-known member
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,927
Reaction score
2,937
Points
188
Website
github.com
*) or the MDUs have the wrong size

They do... they're about 1.5cms larger than they should, so (assuming the margins are proportional) that would make C2 even less wide, thus making the wrong aspect ratio even worst. :facepalm:

The "quick-fix", would be moving C3 up, so C2 isn't as tall as it is. This would have to be done anyway, but I'm not sure it is worth the effort to do it now.
 

Wolf

Donator
Donator
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
1,091
Reaction score
11
Points
38
Location
Milan
They do... they're about 1.5cms larger than they should, so (assuming the margins are proportional) that would make C2 even less wide, thus making the wrong aspect ratio even worst. :facepalm:

The "quick-fix", would be moving C3 up, so C2 isn't as tall as it is. This would have to be done anyway, but I'm not sure it is worth the effort to do it now.

What about OPS6 before that? :lol:
 

GLS

Well-known member
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,927
Reaction score
2,937
Points
188
Website
github.com
What about OPS6 before that? :lol:

Yeah, that will probably be done as part of the ascent changes for SSU 6.0 (GRTLS is maybe half done as part of the entry stuff).

---------- Post added 04-07-19 at 12:46 AM ---------- Previous post was 04-06-19 at 06:18 PM ----------

The new keyboard is up! Keys are now animated, and the keyboard looks much more like the real one.
Unfortunatly that exposed how badly sized (and placed) panel C2 is. For now I'll leave it as is, but I hope to pull panel C3 up, thus making C2 "less bad". There are also some small defects on some normals of the keyboard that I'll fix then.
Meanwhile, enjoy the keys moving. :p

I'll work the slidewire animation tomorrow.
 

Wolf

Donator
Donator
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
1,091
Reaction score
11
Points
38
Location
Milan
Thanks for the nice keypad update :thumbup:

I just updated to the new revision and noticed 2 things: I now have a "super glossy" orbiter and the C3 panel shows random shadows on its surface :shrug:

306.jpg

308.jpg

Could this come from Rev 3013 (light emitter visibility)?...
 

GLS

Well-known member
Orbiter Contributor
Addon Developer
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
5,927
Reaction score
2,937
Points
188
Website
github.com
Thanks for the nice keypad update :thumbup:

I just updated to the new revision and noticed 2 things: I now have a "super glossy" orbiter and the C3 panel shows random shadows on its surface :shrug:

View attachment 16565

View attachment 16566

Could this come from Rev 3013 (light emitter visibility)?...

The glass OV I've seen before, and if I remember it had to do with the GC file settings... DaveS handles that so he should know.

The shadows on panel C3, that's news to me... can you check the other panels for that? If it's only C3, can you go back to r3018 and see if it still happens?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top