Suggestion for future LOD handling

Great!

Many thanks, Anders

Hi there, a suggestion for easy LOD handling for the end user.
In KRS document ‘Train Guidelines’ the rules for naming objects in a model.
First prefix for the LOD-level + ‘_’ + LOD-distance + ‘_’ + object name.
Ex. something like 1_1000_body.

KRS suggests dividing the model into objects for easy LOD-creation by simply removing small detail objects in the more distant LOD-levels.

A model with three LOD-levels might then be something like this;
1_0010_body
1_0010_largedetails
1_0010_smalldetails
2_0100_body
2_0100_largedetails
3_1000_body
‘smalldetails’ go out at 10m, ‘largedetails’ go out 100m. Other than that the instances for the different LOD-levels are exactly the same 1_0010_body, 2_0100_body and 3_1000_body are clones.

Would it not be nice to instead simply model;
1000_body
0100_largedetails
0010_smalldetails
and have the exporter take care of the LOD-level numbering and cloning?

I understand that some might want greater control of the LOD-levels and I’m sure that could be managed also.
I have no idea how LOD-levels work in 3DC as I have not yet started using it.
I have great hopes though as I can see a communication with the end-users that has been non-existant for TSM and gmax.

Regards, Anders

I’ll have to think about this some more.

One thing that the lod export will do is it will automatically create lods, by removing objects too small to be visible at a distance. Unfortunately, it isn’t super ‘clever’ as of yet. Maybe at some point it will get better.

That is precisely what I am thinking of but instead of the exporter trying to figure out which object to remove I tell it by prefixing the distance (or if the distance can be set in some property dialog).

/Anders

Yes, I see the benefit. Sometimes it isn’t easy to integrate good ideas with an existing design. But yes… I’ll think about it when I’m looking at LODs.

That is all that I ask and much more than other support teams offer.

Thanks, Anders

This won’t be in the first LOD release. But, I like the idea. It’s definitely on my ‘likely upgrades’ list.

It all comes down to priorities, and there are a lot of things on my list for Trainworks etc. If only I actually had a ‘team’ <!– s:) –><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt="" title="Smile" /><!– s:) –>

I managed to implement part of your suggestion. [img:1pcqa3wz]http&#58;//amabilis&#46;com/forumattachments?a=tpcands=2396098374andf=50410947331andm=65410598241andr=66610150341#66610150341[/img:1pcqa3wz]
LOD Support